The transport sector has always had its share of animal transport disasters.
But a new report suggests that the most vulnerable animals are not the horses, camels and camels-watching ones but those with disabilities.
The new report by researchers at the University of Bristol, Oxford University and the International Center for the Study of Disabled People (ICSD) is the first to take a look at the vulnerability of these animals to driverless cars.
“The vast majority of our research has been into the drivers, but we are starting to understand how vulnerable animals can be,” said lead researcher, Professor Peter Southey.
The report says that “the most vulnerable species are the animals with disability”.
“We are seeing the impact of driverless vehicles on vulnerable animals like horses and cows, with a loss of freedom and the risk of being killed,” Southew told Business Insider.
“It’s not just animals.
The elderly are particularly at risk.”
What’s the risk?
In a new study, the researchers looked at the number of deaths of horses and cattle in various locations in Europe, the United States and Australia between 2000 and 2010.
They found that between 2005 and 2010, more than 2,600 horses and more than 1,400 cattle were killed due to driverlessness.
“It is important to recognise that these numbers do not necessarily represent a true death toll, because they are estimates of the number in a particular area,” the report said.
It also noted that “driverless vehicles pose a significant risk to humans and the environment” in terms of the impact on wildlife and human health.
The number of horses killed in the UK in 2010 was nearly five times higher than the figure in the United Kingdom.
The report found that the number has increased by a factor of nine in the past five years.
According to the report, the UK has more than a third of the world’s horses and calves, but it’s the most populous country in Europe.
Australia, which also has a significant number of cattle, also has more horses than humans, but there are also far fewer horses.
The study also found that in the Netherlands, more horses were killed than cows and people, but the number was lower than in the rest of Europe.
But what about the animals in the US?
“In the United states, the number is higher than in Europe,” Soutshew said.
“There are more horses in the country than people.
But the drivers have a higher death rate than the animals.”
In the UK, the majority of animals killed by driverless transport occur in urban areas.
However, there are some notable exceptions.
According to a 2015 report from the US Department of Transportation, the percentage of animals being killed by human drivers was 0.3% in 2016.
However, the report did not find an increase in the number that were killed by car or trucks.
“There is a huge difference between what is happening in the wild versus in the city, and that’s where you see the big difference,” Soushey said.
“In a city like New York, you have a much more diverse population of people, and in a country like Europe you have much more rural population.”
How dangerous is driverless vehicle travel?
The report looked at all of the states and territories in the world, and found that driverless systems were more likely to cause human fatalities.
In some states, they are almost 10 times more likely than human drivers to be killed in a car crash.
Researchers found that vehicle fatalities accounted for more than half of all fatalities.
“The risks of driverlessness in the transport sector are quite substantial,” Soudhey said, noting that the “disruption to human life, loss of property, property damage, the loss of revenue from loss of human life and the possibility of the driverless system destroying private property are all associated with human-vehicle crashes.”
“These are the consequences of a system that is driven by people.”
What can be done?
There are a number of ways to mitigate the potential risks of a driverLESS vehicle.
The report recommends that vehicle owners “encourage their vehicle drivers to use their own mobility devices to access the road.”
Vehicles with “safety-conscious” features are also a good idea, such as a “safety door” or a “shield”, that can be rolled up to help protect the vehicle.
“We’re not saying that we don’t want people to be able to ride in their vehicles,” SOUTEY said.
More than half the vehicles in the report were either “unlicensed” or “unregistered”.
“That means that they are not registered, or have not been inspected by a relevant authority,” SOUTH said.SOUTH added that the researchers also recommend that “vehicles that have been registered should be considered for mandatory installation of a blind spot sensor and