Car safety stats (risk of death vs risk of killing other drivers)

fft1976 · 2009-04-01T06:36:32+00:00

I found this interesting study that shows the risk to drivers of othervehicles vs the risk to drivers for different 1995-1999 vehiclemodels. cars, it shows Camry to be the safest (with Accord and otherspretty close). The data is not normalized per mile traveled though.What I find odd is that Prizm is considerably less safe than Corolla,according to them. Is there a likely mechanical explanation (dualairbags are standard in both, but perhaps the quality is different),or is this a statistical artifact due to the poorer and thus youngerpeople buying Prizms?By the way, does anyone know of a similar, but more up-to-date study?I'd also like the probabilities of disablement included with the datagiven per mile traveled.

Apr 01, 2009 102 Replies

Rate this thread:

Jim Yanik 17 years ago

Grumpy AuContraire wrote in news:HRQFl.1245$ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

Nonsense. There's oil off the California coast,and some of it NATURALLY bubbles up from the sea floor. There's oil in coastal ANWR. There's oil off the coast of South America,and oil in the South China Sea(a shallow sea,too). there's still enough places we haven't even explored yet,too.

our main problem now is the environuts/socialists who hinder our drilling and refining,and cost us economically and strategically by making us dependent on foreign oil.

with -today's- processes. The use of some of those might even be inhibited by the environuts who want us to do without oil.

Vote

dgk 17 years ago

Even if you were right and these is actually plenty of oil (you aren't but let's just assume), you think it's ok to keep burning it at the rate we do? It's all just a plot of the environnut socialists to keep the poor capitalists from enjoying life? Global warming and the threat of huge damage to the earth is just another plot, right?

Vote

Gordon McGrew 17 years ago

There certainly are untapped oil deposits, but they aren't as big as you think. If ANWR came on line next year, it might take US production levels back to 1999, but nowhere near our 1970 peak. The reality of the development process is that, by the earliest time the undeveloped US capacity could come on line, we will be lucky if it would bring us back up to today's production level.

There is no magic recovery process. You can't do it with a microchip. It is very slow, very dirty and very expensive.

Vote

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required