The article "Beyond the Scooter Rhetoric" presupposes that the decision to ride a scooter or not is to be made by some sort of collective authority. From there it goes into a long song and dance as to the effects of scooters on energy efficiency, time savings, health benefits, injury risks, greenhouse gases (!), public transport, motor vehicle congestion. Then it presumes that some "proof" of all these effects is required. Finally, it presents a table of "results" which purports to demonstrate this. There are a few problems with this whole approach.
The table itself isn't particularly clear as to what's trying to demonstrate. After some time puzzling about it, I concluded it's intended to compare scooters against other modes of transportation. It seems to show scooters seem to be preferred, followed by bicycles and walking. Automobiles and public transportation seem less preferred than anything else. This is very odd as the previous sentence suggests that scooters have none of the indicated benefits! Sorry, it makes no sense to me.
But that's not my major complaint with the article. I dispute: