I’ve often wondered whether our transport systems would be different if planners had explicit discussions about the injuries and deaths that different systems will inevitably bring. Imagine a group of such planners sitting around a table. One has a proposal for an elevated expressway, another for trains, to connect two cities. Within those cities, one planner proposes wider, smoother, faster roads; another wishes to expand public transit and improve facilities for walking and cycling. Then come the injury estimates: how many amputated legs, how many broken backs, how many deaths in order to achieve the planned speed and mobility by roads? How much could we reduce those injuries and deaths by investing instead in inter-city rail, public transit, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities? We can try to keep making our cars safer, but the truth is, the combination of weight and speed is deadly. In 2010, an estimated 1.24 million people died in road crashes throughout the world. If we took those figures seriously when making our plans for transport systems, if we prioritized the plans that would invariably lead to far fewer fatalities and injuries, we could not only save life and limb, but improve our environment and our health in countless ways.