Archive for the ‘Bicycles’ Category

Cash for Clunkers: The Bike Edition

“Cash for clunkers” is a potentially bad idea, for a number of reasons that have been explored elsewhere.

But as long as one is seeking stimulus, and ostensibly green benefits, why not extend the program to bikes? The ETA (the other ETA!) has a petition here.

I’m looking to upgrade my old Gary Fisher and wouldn’t mind some tax joy.

Posted on Friday, May 1st, 2009 at 7:28 am by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Cash for Clunkers: The Bike Edition. Click here to leave a comment.

Bike Locally

I found the most telling — and really, the only actionable — bit of this whole piece in the New Scientist piece about a computer model on the pros/cons of mandatory cycle helmet laws came in the last line:

However de Jong, a native of bike-loving Holland, makes clear that he would not discourage people from wearing helmets. “I go to Holland and places like that, and I don’t wear a helmet,” he says. “I used to live in London, and I wore a helmet all the time.”

Posted on Monday, April 27th, 2009 at 11:14 am by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Bike Locally. Click here to leave a comment.

The Geography of Danger

A map via This is London (thanks Berkeley TSC) that pinpoints bicycle crashes in 2007. While an interesting first step, it doesn’t link up to details on exposure details, nor street characteristics, nor time of day, nor exact crash causality — not to mention the danger itself that people view a couple of red dots on their street and think they see a pattern when regression to the mean may see no incidents on that street for the next few years.

But this hints at the evolving potential of GIS, etc.

Posted on Friday, March 20th, 2009 at 2:30 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on The Geography of Danger. Click here to leave a comment.

Lane Discipline

Driveways are one of the more dangerous suburban landscape features (for all modes), and I was intrigued to see this approach, outside of a store, somewhere in Japanese suburbia. I love the landing-strip wands and all.

Posted on Wednesday, March 18th, 2009 at 11:58 am by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Lane Discipline. Click here to leave a comment.

The Phantom Menace

Streetsblog has a good interview with Manhattan D.A. candidate Leslie Crockett Snyder on the subject of “traffic justice.” The piece notes the following:

Snyder said that the biggest traffic safety complaint she hears from community leaders these days is not about reckless motorists but “bicyclists being dangerous” and “messengers running us over.” If she is elected DA, she invites livable streets advocates to educate her on the issues and “meet with me regularly and make sure I’m staying on top of it.”

This incredibly oft-repeated idea — that cyclists are some grave threat to the lives of pedestrians, not motorists — is one of my greatest sources of irritation, and also puzzlement. I don’t have the NYC stats at hand, but in London, for example, from 2001 to 2005 there were 535 pedestrians killed by automobile. The number killed by cyclists? One. (the injury numbers are equally skewed, even taking into account possible underreporting).

One obvious reason for this is that humans generally rely on an imprecise calculus for real and subjective risk (this book provides an excellent survey of risk analysis). Things that are novel or out of our perceived control invoke particular “dread”; so too do those things we can more easily remember.

In an endnote to Traffic (and you really should read the endnotes!), I quote a bit from what I thought was a good answer to this question, from Ryan Russo, of the NYC DOT. The endnote runs as follows:

In New York City, an undercurrent of public opinion says that bicycles are “dangerous.” Neighborhoods have fought against the addition of bike lanes for this very reason. Yet one could count the number of people killed by bicycles in New York City each year on one hand, with a few fingers left over, while many times that number of people are killed or severely injured by cars. When I met with Ryan Russo, an engineer with the New York City Department of Transportation, I could not help but hear the echo of several of the reasons why we misperceive risk. “It’s silent and it’s rare,” he told me, when I asked about New Yorkers’ antipathy toward cyclists. “As opposed to cars, which make noise and are prevalent. You don’t see it because it’s smaller, you don’t hear it approach because it’s silent, and you don’t expect it because it’s not prevalent.” A close call with a cyclist, no matter how less dangerous statistically, stands out as the greater risk than a close call with a car, even though—or in fact precisely because—pedestrians are constantly having near-hazardous encounters with turning cars in crosswalks.

Following that idea that one does not expect it because it’s “not prevalent,” this might key in to the idea that novel risks are perceived more intensely than the everyday, mundane risks (like those posed to pedestrians from cars).

There are other possible reasons. Pedestrians may not be cyclists as much as they are also drivers, so they may feel more a hostility to, or less kinship to, cyclists. People may not respect the legitimacy of cyclists as a form of transportation as much as they do automobiles. Maybe there’s something about the idea that cyclists are often found on sidewalks, and perhaps pedestrians view them as a more personal encroachment than cars, to whom the road “belongs” (I should point out that even when we’re talking about fatalities on sidewalks, cars are much more the prime offender). Another possible reason is what’s been dubbed here as “bikeism”; pedestrians may somehow deem the actions of cyclists as being part of their character, rather than to situational responses in the moment. Thus the action of one bad cyclists comes to taint all of cyclingdom, while the actions of many bad drivers are diffused into a sort of blameless norm.

I was actually talking about this a bit recently with Dr. Oz (yes, he of Oprah fame) on his radio show. In theory, cyclists and pedestrians would enjoy more collegial relations (and maybe they do; maybe it’s only the people call in to complain to the DA who don’t like cyclists) because, unlike drivers, they are not shrouded in thousands of pounds of metal. Pedestrians and cyclists can often make eye contact (an agent of cooperation), they can literally feel each other’s humanity. Then again, maybe this only perversely raises the level of antagonism; and, as I mentioned in Traffic, people are more likely to refer to cyclists as cyclists, where they often talk about a car instead of the person driving that car. With a cycle there is less chance of the actor being subsumed by the vehicle; does the anonymity of the “car as threat” thus make it less memorable, or, again, less personal?

To refresh, however, bicycles as an urban threat must surely be exceeded by any number of hazards, ranging from fatal slips down stairs to dog attacks. And they are vastly exceeded as a threat to pedestrians by cars. Cities would do well to run ad campaigns touting the benefits to everyone of cycling, and dispelling some of the falsehoods concerning risk (maybe a simple campaign, on bus sides, showing a car and a cycle, saying This is X Times More Dangerous Than This, or some such).

Posted on Monday, March 16th, 2009 at 12:43 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on The Phantom Menace. Click here to leave a comment.

Pedaling Revolution

Jeff Mapes’ new book Pedaling Revolution is out, and he’ll be in New York on Friday for a Q&A/signing.

I provided this comment to the book’s publisher:

“Writing from Portland, the hub of the American cycling renaissance, Jeff Mapes, brimming with passion, humor and salutary insight, makes an admirably clear-headed, convincing and, ultimately, humane argument for making more room for the two-wheeler, in our lives and on our roads.”

Posted on Wednesday, March 11th, 2009 at 7:27 am by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Pedaling Revolution. Click here to leave a comment.

The Helmeted Cyclist as an “Indicator Species”

There are some striking passages in the new “Cycling in the Netherlands” report (via David Hembrow).

Wearing a bicycle helmet for daily trips is unusual in the Netherlands. Only competitive cyclists or mountain bikers tend to wear a helmet for their sport. Some parents give young children bicycle helmets. Usually the helmet is simply packed away for good before the offspring are 10 years old. There is certainly no support for mandatory helmeting. The fear exists that making it mandatory would cause a drop in bicycle use.

Sound dangerous? No, the reverse.

To talk about the relationship of bike helmets to safety is, it seems, to approach the situation in the wrong way. A useful analogy, I think, is to consider the presence or absence of certain species of birds in our environment. The near-disappearance of the peregrine falcon several decades ago was, it turned out, an indicator of the presence of toxic contaminants in our midst (it wasn’t just a bird problem, it was a human problem); we addressed the problem (somewhat), and the falcons returned. Conversely, the appearance of a flock of bike helmets could be read as a sign of safe and responsible individual behavior, or it could represent a species under attack in an unsustainable environment. To take another example, various species of woodpeckers have been on the decline, not just because of habitat loss, but because of the decline of natural processes, like fire, that give them the habitat they need. There too is a metaphor for cycling culture — without habitat, without the right habitat, a species won’t thrive. Given the Netherlands’ experience, helmets matter rather little — much more important are facilities, riders, enforcement, incentives, and the broader culture comprised of these things.

There’s all sorts of other interesting stuff in the report; e.g., this passage:

Most children are taught to ride a bicycle by their parents or a brother or sister at a very early age. This is less apparent amongst the growing of migrant population. Traditionally the bicycle is not part of Turkish or Moroccan culture. Often the parents cannot ride a bicycle, so no suitable bicycles are available in the household. In large cities with many migrants, extra attention is thus devoted to cycling skills in primary school. To ensure that all children gain cycling experience, the Amsterdam municipality makes bicycles available to schools, for instance. In a number of cities cycling courses for migrant women are also held. They can then master cycling in a protected environment. Many participants enjoy this as an opportunity to develop more skills.

The city giving bikes to schools — amazing! Here (in NYC) we read about community resistance to bike lanes so as not to interrupt the smooth vehicular conveyance of children to schools, typically in oversized vehicles that themselves are a threat to the urban environment.

Posted on Friday, March 6th, 2009 at 1:10 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on The Helmeted Cyclist as an “Indicator Species”. Click here to leave a comment.

Lane Splitting

The earlier posting on late merging reminds reader Joel of the issue of “lane splitting,” by which motorcyclists (and sometimes bicyclists) ride in the space between cars, ideally in heavy traffic. This is legal in California and other states, but, as he points out, it seems to raise drivers’ hackles (in places like Rome, of course, it’s an everyday fact of life, as scooters by the dozens “filter” between cars to settle near the front of stopped queues at traffic lights).

It’s an interesting, much-discussed issue (see here or here for example) because it raises so many of the issues that come up in traffic: Social justice (hey, why are they allowed to move when I’m stuck in traffic), different modes sharing the same road space, trading off risks, not to mention cognitive psychology.

Like so many things in traffic, it’s complex. In theory, I like the idea — why shouldn’t we use as much road space as possible? (the extra lane space put in for safety at high speeds is essentially wasted during congestion). A motorcycle between streams of cars shortens the length of the queue for cars, after all (and unlike HOV or hybrid lanes, doesn’t reduce existing highway space). On the other hand, there have been times when I’ve been absolutely startled by a motorcyclist unexpectedly passing me. This raises the question of the “attentional set”: If we don’t usually expect motorcycles to be there, will we not see them as we change lanes, or if we unintentionally “drift” a bit? (for the biker, the added problem is the people who don’t signal before changing).

And yet the smaller visual profile of motorcycles means we may not see them in front of us as easily as a car — not to mention the fact that the small fender-bender of stop-and-go traffic means more to a cyclist’s health than a car driver’s — and this brings up the point that has always been made vis a vis lane splitting: That being rear-ended by a car is a much greater hazard than riding between the lanes. The leading authority on this, and motorcycle safety in general, is Harry Hurt, author of the famous “Hurt Report” and now based here, who is quoted here as saying: “For a motorcyclist, that’s the safest place to be [between streams of traffic]… A lot of people think it’s a hazard, but the cold, hard facts are that it’s not.”

As far as I know, the “Hurt Report” has never been duplicated in size or scope, even as more motorcyclists have hit the road. The author himself seemed to think its 1970s-era findings, however, still hold valid.

As it happens, yesterday I was just reading a piece in Outside about the idea of bringing Asian-style “motorcycle taxis” to the U.S. The piece notes:

In the U.S., moto-taxis face two main obstacles. The first is insurance. When EagleRider, now the largest motorcycle-rental company, initially shopped for insurance, their rates were three times what they’re paying now. The second problem is a traffic law in 37 states that bans “splitting”—the practice of riding between lanes. Sounds unsafe, but even when allowed, it accounts for only 3 percent of motorcycle fatalities. When it’s outlawed, you’re stuck in crosstown traffic just like everyone else, only you’re breathing exhaust.

The 3% number is interesting; then again, if lane-splitting was only done when it is supposed to be, during slow or stopped heavy traffic, I wouldn’t expect large numbers of fatalities.

Any motorcyclists out there care to weigh in? Cyclists? Drivers? People selling things at traffic lights? (they too lane split)

And just to muddy the waters, speaking of social justice and road sharing, I’ve been annoyed lately to see motorized scooters chugging along in the bike lanes in Brooklyn and elsewhere. My knee-jerk reaction is ‘that’s not what their for” and ‘I don’t want your exhaust in my face’; but maybe I’m too harsh — perhaps if it’s otherwise unoccupied it’d be OK. But while it may make them feel safer, they may only be raising their exposure to “dooring” and other hazards.

Posted on Wednesday, February 25th, 2009 at 12:31 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Lane Splitting. Click here to leave a comment.

Bad Cycling? Bad Science

Here is what insurance company LV has to say about cycling safety in the U.K.:

“Mounting financial pressures have led to a surge in inexperienced cyclists taking to the roads,” say LV in their press release: “resulting in a 29% increase in road accidents involving cyclists in the past six months.”

This from a press release titled: “ROAD USERS WARNED OVER INEXPERIENCED CYCLISTS.” Road users aren’t the same as cyclists, inexperienced or not?

And here’s what Bad Science author Ben Goldacre says: “It’s topical, it involves death and fear, it’s dressed in the cloak of statistical authority: this is totally going on the telly.”

Read his full dissection here. The problems seem legion; for beginners, we don’t know that the cyclists hit are indeed the novel cyclists. These sorts of insurance-company led “studies” come up all the time in the media, and I’m not sure whether they’re done as PR stunts (I love that phrase “PR-reviewed scientific evidence”) for a willing media, or to scare us all into buying more insurance (or maybe getting us off the bike and into a car). There are real issues here, but head-line chasing does no one a service.

Posted on Wednesday, February 18th, 2009 at 3:18 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Bad Cycling? Bad Science. Click here to leave a comment.

When Is a Stop Sign Not a Stop Sign

Reading this post about a law to allow cyclists to treat stop signs as a yield, something that invariably tends to raise ire among drivers (and some cyclists), reminded me of this post from a while ago — the video embedded there reminds us of the small fact that many drivers (at least in Kansas) already tend to treat “Stop” sign as a yield (at best).

And, in case you haven’t read it, after the jump I’ve posted the classic article (from Access magazine) by physicist Joel Fajans and Melanie Curry, “Why Cyclists Hate Stop Signs.”

(Horn honk to Richard)


Posted on Tuesday, February 10th, 2009 at 1:54 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on When Is a Stop Sign Not a Stop Sign. Click here to leave a comment.

Free Rider Problem

The BBC reports on the bumpy road for Paris’ Velib bike-sharing program.

The company which runs the scheme, JCDecaux, says it can no longer afford to operate the city-wide network.

Championed by Paris Mayor Bertrand Delanoe, the bikes were part of an attempt to “green” the capital.

Parisians took to them enthusiastically. But the bikes have suffered more than anticipated, company officials have said.

Hung from lamp posts, dumped in the River Seine, torched and broken into pieces, maintaining the network is proving expensive. Some have turned up in eastern Europe and Africa, according to press reports. \

The video below reveals the sort of users who were probably not part of the intended target audience.

Posted on Tuesday, February 10th, 2009 at 11:08 am by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Free Rider Problem. Click here to leave a comment.

Bikes Not Bombs

John Adams explodes the fear of “bicycle bombs.” And his point on life jackets is well taken too.

[I should clarify, vis a vis the comment below, that Adams is talking about actual bicycles converted into bombs, rather than explosives attached to bicycles — which seems to be the case in this article — which are in theory no different than explosives strapped to human suicide bombers.]

Posted on Tuesday, November 11th, 2008 at 4:01 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Bikes Not Bombs. Click here to leave a comment.


Hanoi crazy night traffic from v!Nc3sl4s on Vimeo

I came across this entrancing video of night traffic in Hanoi, a city said to currently have the highest per-capita motorbike usage in the world. It’s hard not to watch this and be dazzled by the wonderfully organic, almost aquatic flow — no man steps into the same Hanoi traffic stream twice. “It somehow works,” you hear people say. Matt Steinglass reminds us it’s not often as pretty as it looks.

I was in Hanoi last December, on the eve of the country’s new compulsory helmet law (which according to one account seems to have brought a 30% reduction in injuries, though presumably we’ll need more time and better science to see how it shakes out), and seeing this video had me in a nostalgic mood.

So allow me to drag out the photo album for a moment, of snaps taken mostly from the back of moto-taxis:

Watching Hanoi traffic is hypnotizing, like sitting on a beach and watching waves break.

There were many stylish riders, but helmets were not generally considered a vital accessory.


Posted on Friday, November 7th, 2008 at 11:06 am by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Hanoi. Click here to leave a comment.

Stop and Roll

A reader from D.C. writes with the news that there is some very initial exploration of a “stop and roll”-style ordinance, a la Idaho, that would allow cyclists to essentially treat signalized intersections as stop signs as “yield” signs.

I know that San Francisco (whose landscape is more akin to D.C. than Idaho) has been batting the idea around, but does anyone else know of any initiatives out there have been successful, or any studies that show the effects of such a law in Idaho or elsewhere?

Posted on Thursday, November 6th, 2008 at 12:16 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Stop and Roll. Click here to leave a comment.

Speaking of Bikes…

Via David Hembrow, check out this trailer for Van Der Valk, an early 70s Brit cop show set in Amsterdam. Note that you only see a few cyclists (and one horse-drawn wagon); it might as well be Starsky and Hutch cruising around their fictive Southern California. It’s an interesting reminder that cities like Amsterdam and Copenhagen were not just natural cycling hotbeds, but became so through very conscious decisions made by planners and politicians.

Posted on Tuesday, October 28th, 2008 at 3:50 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Speaking of Bikes…. Click here to leave a comment.

Word of the Day: Bikeism

Adrian, a psychology grad student in Australia, wrote in with mention of a disturbing episode in Australia, recounted here, of a car driver going after some cyclists in an “Around the Bay Day” event (for charity, mind you).

What one editorialist also found objectionable, however, was the link at the bottom of the page where readers could vote on that day’s opinion question. The question was: Are cyclists responsible road users?

Not really the first question that comes to mind after reading the original article (I’m almost afraid to know what the answer was). As the writer put it, “OK. If those hooligans had bowled over a bunch of grannies going to church, would readers be having their say on whether senior citizens are responsible road users?” A more contextually appropriate question to vote on, in my opinion, would have been: Should drivers who commit what is essentially aggravated assault with a deadly weapon have their driving rights permanently revoked? (uh, yeah)

The writer went on to coin the word “bikeism” to describe the dynamics he thought were at work — tarring an entire class of people with the extreme acts committed by a few (or a stereotypical image of that behavior). “Unfortunately, many motorists who don’t ride bikes and don’t understand cycling seem to think that all cyclists are ego-driven menaces who run red lights.” (more…)

Posted on Tuesday, October 28th, 2008 at 3:35 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Word of the Day: Bikeism. Click here to leave a comment.

To Wear Or Not to Wear (and Is That Even the Right Question?): Ian Walker on Cycle Helmets

When I was in the U.K. doing radio interviews for Traffic, I would often get asked if wearing cycle helmets actually made things less safe for cyclists. This happened primarily because the book features rather striking research by Ian Walker, a traffic psychologist at the University of Bath, and this was mentioned in the press kit.

To briefly summarize, in his study (published as “Drivers overtaking bicyclists: Objective data on the effects of riding position, helmet use, vehicle type and apparent gender,” in the journal Accident Analysis and Prevention), Walker outfitted a bike with a device that measured the distance of passing cars. He found, among other things, that drivers tended to pass more closely when he was wearing a helmet than when not (he was struck by vehicles twice, both while wearing a helmet).

This was a surprising, somewhat controversial finding that generated a lot of news coverage. To my mind, Walker’s findings were more interesting for what they said about interpersonal psychology on the road than safety itself; mostly because I felt, and Walker seems to agree, that the primary question of bicycle safety had less to do with the helmet than other factors. As the above photo suggests, cyclists in places like Copenhagen or Amsterdam very rarely wear helmets, and yet they enjoy a much safer ride than in places (like the U.S.) where helmet-wearing seems more ingrained. The argument is often made that those places have protected cycle lanes and the like — though the photo also shows that is not always the case.

But to return to the radio interviews, I often found myself getting frustrated because the radio journalists seemed to want a handy “takeaway” answer: Well, do helmets make cyclists safer or not? The problem was, I really didn’t know (disclaimer: I do wear one, rather out of habit and without much thought other than a fear of New York City streets).

This was a problem I had in trying to give many answers relating to traffic — there are often an endless series of “on the other hand” qualifiers. As with any kind of epidemiological inquiry, traffic presents such a complex system, with so many interacting variables (e.g., do helmets make drivers act less safe) and “confounding factors” and incomplete data sets, that coming up with easy answers is impossible: and anyone who seems to have easy answers probably doesn’t know what they’re talking about. One favorite example of this for me is the nutmeg you hear drivers say, with deeply held conviction: ‘Well I’ve heard it’s not speed itself that’s the problem, it’s differences in speed.’ This is a statement that is true — except when it isn’t. It lacks context, it lacks explanatory power. We would do as well, if not better, to note that every traffic fatality/injury involves speed: If the car wasn’t moving, no one would have died/been injured.

But I was curious as to how Ian Walker, after putting his research into the world and subsequently being asked these sorts of questions, undergoing these sorts of debates, ultimately felt himself about what his findings (at least on several stretches on English roads) had revealed.

Over to you, Dr. Walker:

“The apparently simple query ‘Do bicycle helmets work?’ turns out to be the most complex question I have ever encountered. Since I published my own small contribution to the nightmarish tangle of helmet research a couple of years ago, I have read and answered hundreds of emails on the subject from interested – in both senses of the word – people. I am grateful to Tom for giving me this chance to summarize a few of my disjointed thoughts on the matter.


Posted on Wednesday, October 1st, 2008 at 4:01 pm by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on To Wear Or Not to Wear (and Is That Even the Right Question?): Ian Walker on Cycle Helmets. Click here to leave a comment.

Wheels of Fortune

Which Asian vehicle manufacturer is on track for its best-ever year?

Giant, the Taiwanese bicycle manufacturer, notes The Economist. Supply is so short in its home market that Giant buyers put money down months ahead of receiving their wheels.

Posted on Monday, September 29th, 2008 at 8:25 am by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on Wheels of Fortune. Click here to leave a comment.

This Just In From the “Depends How You Look at It Department”

One of the hallmarks of sensationalist papers like the New York Post is that the purported thesis of a story, loudly trumpeted in a headline, often seems undermined by the story itself. The case in point here is “Anger at Mike the Road Hog; Pedestrian Islands Drive Motorists Nuts,” (below the jump) about the new pedestrian space on Broadway in Manhattan.

The paper cites precisely two people who claim the project is a disaster; an “office worker” and a 24-year-old “Jersey commuter.” Of course, the Post could have simply wandered up to cars stopped at lights and asked the opinions of other motorists. They predictably would have bemoaned traffic, questioned the idea of taking away road space, etc. — and basically said the opposite of what people sitting in the new plaza would have said (not that they polled any of those). But the newspaper seemed content with a couple of random miffed types.

And, of course, nowhere does the Post bring up the uncomfortable fact that drivers on Broadway are the minority of street users, despite taking up a majority of the space, or even raise the question of to what extent Manhattan should be designed to make the lives of Jersey car commuters easier.

The piece then goes on to cite two people who think the pedestrian plaza is just fine: A shopkeeper and the head of the local Business Improvement District, two people who presumably have a greater stake in the actual lifeblood of the neighborhood. Throw in the DOT commish who gave the go-ahead to the project and it seems like a majority of the people in the story actually support the project.

Not that you’d know that from the headline, which makes Mayor Mike out to be a traffic tyrant rather than civic hero, and paints the whole thing as a misguided folly. There’s also a few gratuitous mentions of “road-rage inducing” projects like the Ninth Avenue cycle lane, etc. This road rage would presumably not extend to the many numbers of new cyclists in the city who are taking advantage of these facilities.

And for what it’s worth, for the guy who thinks the plaza will be a waste of space during the winter (space which could be better given over to tourists in cars coming to look at the Christmas Tree), he should get himself to Copenhagen, where, thanks to outdoor heaters and the like, the city has an almost year-round outdoor cafe culture.


Posted on Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008 at 7:55 am by: Tom Vanderbilt
Comments Off on This Just In From the “Depends How You Look at It Department”. Click here to leave a comment.
Traffic Tom Vanderbilt

How We Drive is the companion blog to Tom Vanderbilt’s New York Times bestselling book, Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us), published by Alfred A. Knopf in the U.S. and Canada, Penguin in the U.K, and in languages other than English by a number of other fine publishers worldwide.

Please send tips, news, research papers, links, photos (bad road signs, outrageous bumper stickers, spectacularly awful acts of driving or parking or anything traffic-related), or ideas for my Transport column to me at:

For publicity inquiries, please contact Kate Runde at Vintage:

For editorial inquiries, please contact Zoe Pagnamenta at The Zoe Pagnamenta Agency:

For speaking engagement inquiries, please contact
Kim Thornton at the Random House Speakers Bureau:

Order Traffic from:

Amazon | B&N | Borders
Random House | Powell’s

U.S. Paperback UK Paperback
Traffic UK
Drive-on-the-left types can order the book from

For UK publicity enquiries please contact Rosie Glaisher at Penguin.

Upcoming Talks

April 9, 2008.
California Office of Traffic Safety Summit
San Francisco, CA.

May 19, 2009
University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies
Bloomington, MN

June 23, 2009
Driving Assessment 2009
Big Sky, Montana

June 26, 2009
PRI World Congress
Rotterdam, The Netherlands

June 27, 2009
Day of Architecture
Utrecht, The Netherlands

July 13, 2009
Association of Transportation Safety Information Professionals (ATSIP)
Phoenix, AZ.

August 12-14
Texas Department of Transportation “Save a Life Summit”
San Antonio, Texas

September 2, 2009
Governors Highway Safety Association Annual Meeting
Savannah, Georgia

September 11, 2009
Oregon Transportation Summit
Portland, Oregon

October 8
Honda R&D Americas
Raymond, Ohio

October 10-11
INFORMS Roundtable
San Diego, CA

October 21, 2009
California State University-San Bernardino, Leonard Transportation Center
San Bernardino, CA

November 5
Southern New England Planning Association Planning Conference
Uncasville, Connecticut

January 6
Texas Transportation Forum
Austin, TX

January 19
Yale University
(with Donald Shoup; details to come)

Monday, February 22
Yale University School of Architecture
Eero Saarinen Lecture

Friday, March 19
University of Delaware
Delaware Center for Transportation

April 5-7
University of Utah
Salt Lake City
McMurrin Lectureship

April 19
International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association (Organization Management Workshop)
Austin, Texas

Monday, April 26
Edmonton Traffic Safety Conference
Edmonton, Canada

Monday, June 7
Canadian Association of Road Safety Professionals
Niagara Falls, Ontario

Wednesday, July 6
Fondo de Prevención Vial
Bogotá, Colombia

Tuesday, August 31
Royal Automobile Club
Perth, Australia

Wednesday, September 1
Australasian Road Safety Conference
Canberra, Australia

Wednesday, September 22

Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s
Traffic Incident Management Enhancement Program
Statewide Conference
Wisconsin Dells, WI

Wednesday, October 20
Rutgers University
Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation
Piscataway, NJ

Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Ontario Injury Prevention Resource Centre
Injury Prevention Forum

Monday, May 2
Idaho Public Driver Education Conference
Boise, Idaho

Tuesday, June 2, 2011
California Association of Cities
Costa Mesa, California

Sunday, August 21, 2011
American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators
Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Attitudes: Iniciativa Social de Audi
Madrid, Spain

April 16, 2012
Institute for Sensible Transport Seminar
Gardens Theatre, QUT
Brisbane, Australia

April 17, 2012
Institute for Sensible Transport Seminar
Centennial Plaza, Sydney
Sydney, Australia

April 19, 2012
Institute for Sensible Transport Seminar
Melbourne Town Hall
Melbourne, Australia

January 30, 2013
University of Minnesota City Engineers Association Meeting
Minneapolis, MN

January 31, 2013
Metropolis and Mobile Life
School of Architecture, University of Toronto

February 22, 2013
ISL Engineering
Edmonton, Canada

March 1, 2013
Australian Road Summit
Melbourne, Australia

May 8, 2013
New York State Association of
Transportation Engineers
Rochester, NY

August 18, 2013 “Ingenuity” Conference
San Francisco, CA

September 26, 2013
TransComm 2013
(Meeting of American Association
of State Highway and Transportation
Officials’ Subcommittee on Transportation
Grand Rapids MI



August 2020

No, you probably won be compensated one million dollars; however, with the right blend of negotiating skills and patience, your efforts will be substantially rewarded!I have seen up to forty thousand dollars added to starting compensation through diligent negotiations. It is a way to significantly raise your standard of living and sense of self, simply by