Shining a Light on Biking at Night
Posted by: StephanieSep 29 2008, 8:40 am
The days are getting shorter, but there don't seem to be any fewer cyclists on the streets. What can we do to be safe out there?
Oregon law states that cyclists riding in "limited visibility conditions" must have a front white light and rear red light or reflector. I would argue both front and rear lights are essential, and the front light is most important.
Many cyclists feel like a light in back where they can't see what is happening is what will keep them safe, but in fewer than 10% of accidents involving cyclists is the cyclist hit from behind. The front light is key.
There are lot of options out there for lights. Just remember if you're using batteries, a light is ineffective if batteries aren't kept fresh. Also remember that bright clothes, relective vests, and reflective material on your bike and/or gear can go a long way toward making you more visible.
Probably one of the most important things cyclists can do to foster general good will on our shared paths and roadways is to have proper lights and take other measures to be visible. It can be terrifying for drivers, pedestrians, and other cyclists to encounter a cyclist at night that seemingly appears out of nowhere with no lights.
Because the BTA believes this is one of the primary safety issues affecting cyclists, we are currently working on a bike light education project with the Portland Police Bureau Traffic Division as part of our Eye to Eye campaign. We've been out serving Mocktails to evening cyclists and talking with them about bike light laws and good visibility practices.
Soon the traffic division police will be out reemphasizing the the safety message with bike light enforcement actions. They have a grant to install 200 free light sets to cyclists riding at night, but when the those lights are gone, they will be issuing tickets (max fine $97!)
So it's a great time to remind your friends and other cyclists not to get caught riding without lights at night. You'll be doing them a favor in helping them avoid a potential hefty fine, and possibly saving their life.
I like this info to be posted, one item that I've noticed from many of the individuals on the bike challenge from our office (including the Organizer) that appear to be offenders of bicycle safety law. It pertains to 4 way intersections where the bike trail crosses at the intersection. It's a very busy intersection for cars, walkers, joggers, and bikers and has very clearly visable walk signals. There are many bikers who promote safety and biking but yet don't think twice about biking across the intersection when the do not walk sign is clearly on, many don't even slow down. Do bikes not have to obey pedestrian walk signals when they are crossing intersections using the pedestrian crosswalk? I guess what I'm getting at hear is I see many trying to promote biking and bicycle safety and those same individuals pose a risk to themselves and they annoy other bikers and car drivers because they don't want have to stop for a minute at a crosswalk on their way to/from work. If it wasn't for out internal organizer being a main offender of the biking challenge, it might not annoy me as bad, but being part of this challenge should be just as much about education and proper biking.
I actually prefer commuting in the dark, at least during those seasons of the year when car windshields aren't covered with frost. The RealLite on the back (4" x 6", 18 bright LEDs) ensures high visibility from the rear, and my Light & Motion ARC HID, with its approximately 600 lumens of output, lays enough of a beam on the road in front of me at intersections that cars approaching from the right and left stop to let me pass. Car drivers get used to using that illumination on the pavement as an early warning system for oncoming traffic, so it's nice to be able to play into their existing training.
I was surprised to read "fewer than 10% of accidents involving cyclists is the cyclist hit from behind." I would have expected this number to be much higher. Does anyone know where I can find the percentages of other types of accidents?
Could you comment about the pros and cons of blinking versus non-blinking front lights? I've heard that it's harder for drivers to judge the speed of a bike with a blinking light, but blinking seems to be a major marketing point for light manufacturers. Is there some advantage beyond longer battery life?
http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health/risks.htm
Is one statistic for accidents. Note that this is for all ages, so the most common accident involves children riding out of their residential driveway, and getting hit by a passing car, (something that very rarely happens to adult knowledgeable cyclists.) Also note that a lot of collisions involve the cyclist being on the wrong side of the street/traveling the wrong way, so don't do that…
For info on Portland crash rates (including the top six crash types, all of which involve bicyclists being not see from the front or the side) go here.
The report of 10% of bicycle/car crashes nationwide involving the bicyclist hit from behind is from Effective Cycling by John Forester, but I cannot find an online reference.
Thanks for the crash stats, Michelle. It seems good front lighting would help in all of the Top 6 crash categories in Portland (none of which involve getting hit from behind). It looks like we should also work to increase our side visibility (poor side-visibility is implicated to some extent in all six crash categories – even when the cyclist runs a sign/signal, greater side visibility may help the motorist see you better and avoid you if you do something dumb). Most bikes have only one or two tiny spoke reflectors which are often dirty and thus not very effective.
When I am driving, I tend to notice blinking lights more readily than steady lights but steady lights are better for illuminating the way. But why stop at just one light? I have two lights in front and two in back so I always have a backup.
I fully understand the importance of lighting. I have three 120 high intensity LED's as my tailight (Luxeon LED's). They are about 100 Lumans apiece.
For my headlight, I have three options. I have three high intensity LED's. Thats my option one; my minimum. My second option is a 12 watt HID. That's about 600 Lumans. My third option is a 30 watt HID. That one is about 1200 Lumans. I have had drivers say that the 30 watt HID is brighter than most cars' headlights.
To be seen on the sides, my rain jacket is covered with fiber optic light tubes of all colors. To see a picture, go to http://www.allyn.com/lighted/thumb_jacket1.html
It seems to me like the right hook is mostly a case of not being seen from behind. Once the car is beside you, they probably aren't looking anymore.
So you mention on the article that there is a grant for 200 free lights, but you dont indicate how to get them! Any clues? Also, I want to know if there is any initiative to put lights ont the Spring water corridor from Sellwood to 45th, we right very early in the morning and is pitch black plus the road does not have the white lines.
I would like to know What is going on with the Bike and Pedestrian bridge that crosses over the Clackamas River in Gladstone close to high rocks. I moved to Portland 7 months ago and started riding my bike to word and the bridge has always been closed down. The only other way to cross is on 99E and is very dangerous especially since they have been doing construction on the road there and lanes are limited. I have seen several bikers coming off the path along the Wilamette river and have no idea where to go to get down town Oregon City. Construction workers should have a designated place for bikes to get by safely too.
I would like to know What is going on with the Bike and Pedestrian bridge that crosses over the Clackamas River in Gladstone close to high rocks. I moved to Portland 7 months ago and started riding my bike to work and the bridge has always been closed down. The only other way to cross is on 99E and is very dangerous especially since they have been doing construction on the road there and lanes are limited. I have seen several bikers coming off the path along the Wilamette river and have no idea where to go to get down town Oregon City. Construction workers should have a designated place for bikes to get by safely too.
Oh! and the way to get the free lights Rox is to get pulled over by a cop without them………. but once they are gone he will just give you a 97 dollar ticket….. so go buy them instead.
801.325 “Limited visibility condition.” “Limited visibility condition” means:
(1) Any time from sunset to sunrise; and
(2) Any other time when, due to insufficient light or unfavorable atmospheric conditions, persons and vehicles are not clearly discernible on a straight, level, unlighted highway at a distance of 1,000 feet ahead.
(Next I wonder what is the standard for "clearly discernible". I guess maybe that would be whoever has the worst possible vision but still qualifies for a driver's license? If I have to run my lights every time Mr. Magoo might not see me from 1000 feet away, the batteries are not going to remain very "fresh". I know, I know – common sense prevails.)
Some of the systems mentioned above are great but I am on a limited budget. I can't afford a $500 HID lighting system or even a $200 high intensity LED based system. Here is what I'm running: Planet Bike Blaze 1Watt front light – extremely eye-catching but not great for illuminating the road, Planet bike Superflash rear light on my helmet (great light!), Planet Bike Blinky1 on my seat post (too directional). I also just splurged and bought a DiNotte 200L that runs on rechargeable AA NiMh batteries. This was $129 without the charger which I already own. The DiNotte will do a good job of lighting up the road so I don't run into objects in my path after it gets dark.
I'll be running the Blaze 1Watt on flash-mode while I run the DiNotte on constant – both up front. If people don't see me, it will only be because they weren't looking.
I can barely read the black text on the dark grey background. Can you change either the foreground or the background? I think people who have vision problems already will find it impossible to read. Thanks.
Stats are interesting but I take them with a grain of salt for this reason: when my bicycle was run over and crushed by a truck, the police declined to record the event in any way whatever. Except for my jumping out of the way, I might have been killed (since the bike was completely under the truck, literally run over; most of it was directly under the engine when the truck finally stopped, many parts were crushed to tiny fragments or bent by the truck's tire). I was told that since police hadn't witnessed or investigated, no record would be made. After making several phone calls on this, I concluded that the City of Portland wasn't interested.
This particular collision occured before dawn. I had three white lights facing forward, lots of reflectors on bike, reflective garment; I also had the right of way (truck had a stop sign). Since this was officially a non-event, I have no reason to suppose that it was included in the official statistics. How many other such non-events occur in a given year?
Washington State Law requires a front white light with 500 foot visibility and a rear red reflector. A rear red light may be used in place of the reflector.
Keith, I have a 25$ Led light from Joe's that works great for ridding at night the police don't bother me and I have more than enough light from it to see even on the darkest streets. I mainly travel at night and I am ridding from Oregon City to SE Portland on very dark streets. So far I have
yet to change the batteries on the light cause the led uses less power than a regular bulb.
I was wondering if anyone knows if the law states that the lights must be on the bike? I've seen rear lights on bikes as well as on backpacks and the like. Also, what about a headlamp mounted to the helmet versus on the handlebars of the bike. I know the headlamp may cause an issue with where the light is pointing, but is there a law that states that any lights have to be mounted in any specific location? Thanks!
Hi Andy, and all,
The actual text of the law is below. It does not state that the light must be on the bike rather than on the person.
ORS 815.280
(1) A person commits the offense of violation of bicycle equipment requirements if the person does any of the following:
(c) At the times described in the following, a bicycle or its rider must be equipped with lighting equipment that meets the described requirements:
(A) The lighting equipment must be used during limited visibility conditions
(B) The lighting equipment must show a white light visible from a distance of at least 500 feet to the front of the bicycle.
(C) The lighting equipment must have a red reflector or lighting device or material of such a size or characteristic and so mounted as to be visible from all distances up to 600 feet to the rear when directly in front of the lawful lower beams of headlights on a motor vehicle.
I just wanted to add that I purchased a safety vest with 16 LED lights that are both on the front and the back. It also has three different modes of lighting (Slow flash, fast flash and on all of the time). The price is only $11.99 which I thought was a very good price for what you get. The website is:
http://www.northerntool.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_6970_200353629_200353629
I use a strobe light mounted on top of my helmet at night, in addition to the usual front and rear lights. It is one of those units that are sold as emergency flashers for roadside emergencies – very bright. Its advantage is that it can be seen from all directions around me and it is up high so drivers can see it even if other cars block their view of my bike-mounted lights.