Why 100% Adoption of Autonomous Cars Would 0% Work

"CivoLee" (civolee) 03/18/2016 at 00:41 • Filed to: None

3

11

For the past few years, one of the major topics on the minds of both Silicon Valley and the automotive enthusiast community has been self-driving cars, or autonomous vehicles, or just plain robocars if that’s the terminology you’d prefer. Technology has advanced to the point that it is now possible to envision a vehicle that can take its occupants from point A to point B safely with little to no input from a human being. Google has developed their own cute little prototype and they’ve got a fleet of Lidar-equipped Lexus RXs (hybrids of course, since the future has no room for pure ICE vehicles) roaming around California. Ford has some robo-Fusions as well.

It seems car lovers fall into two categories on this subject; optimists that look forward to the day when traffic is but a memory, and pessimists that fear a dreary dystopia in which you’re a mere passenger on every journey not taken on foot. The people actually developing such vehicles seem to be more in favor of the latter scenario, but to them it’s more of a utopia where no one dies in a car accident ever again. The viewpoint of the autonomous car developer is the driver is actually the weakest link in the car, prone to speeding, getting distracted, driving while drunk, and taking unneccesary risks for the sake of saving time that put themselves and others in danger. And the older people get, the worse things become as reaction time and cognitive faculties fade away.

I’m going to say right now that in no way am I against the development or eventual release of self driving cars. I will also admit that the points above are not lost on me, as in the past few months I’ve had to honk at people stopped at green lights, gotten cut off by a girl using her hazard flashers as a turn signal, and nearly been sideswiped by an SUV whose driver thought the “Yield” sign was for traffic in the lane being merged into rather than traffic merging into said lane. But at the same time, I enjoy driving and cars and don’t want to lose that privilege because others abuse it. I also applaud the few automakers that have gone against the grain and publicly stated they’ll make a self-driving car if/when they have no other choice and not before. However, I’m not exactly worried about it because the reality of nothing but robocars on public roads would be very different than driving haters transportation utopians imagine-and possibly worse.

(at least as I understand it....feel free to point out where I’m wrong)

Let’s take a look at one of the scenarios peddled by autonomous car makers to John Q Public via posts on tech blogs and such. You go out in the morning and summon your car from your garage or perhaps you call a public use car that’s always on the electrically charged road via a smartphone app like Uber. Then instead of sitting in morning rush hour, you go blasting down the interstate at 160 mph while catching up on work and then get off at your exit while the other cars move along like schools of fish. The car then drops you off at work and returns home to take the children to school if it’s yours, or goes to pick up another user if it’s a public car. At the end of the work day, you summon it to take you home or get another public car. On the way home, you balance your budget and remark to yourself about how little you pay for car insurance anymore.

Now let’s talk about everything that’s inaccurate about that.

First, robocar supporters claim that any time your car spends parked is wasted and that it should be out doing other things, like helping other people get around or somehow running errands for you. They overlook the fact that being parked gives cars a chance to cool down and keeps parts from wearing out too quickly. Anyone that knows anything about endurance racing knows it’s just as hard on the cars as it is the drivers. For a car to be on the road constantly at high speeds would be like running the Lemans 24 Hours 7 days a week, 365 days a year. They’d rack up the miles much faster under heavier stress and in turn, wear out much sooner. Now, one could say, “OK, so why couldn’t they just build the cars to higher stress tolerances?” They could in theory, but this would make them even more expensive to manufacture than they are now.

Second, robocar supporters talk about shared ownership. This works only on a small scale. My research tells me there are rough 319 million people living in the United States alone, and about 256 million vehicles. This means that unless everybody is carpooling, a good chunk of those people would have to walk during peak times. “Sorry I couldn’t come to work the other day; there weren’t any cars left.” Build more cars, you say? Without private sales, who will provide the capital to do so? Where would we fit them all? Aren’t major roads crowded enough already?

Third, the robocar crowd loves to wax ecstatic about electric autocars powered by electrified roadways so they’ll never have to recharge. Cool, but the power needs for said roads would tax the existing electrical grid beyond its tolerances. This means we’d have to build more power plants to compensate. Currently, the most portable plants (meaning not dependent on local geography the way wind, hydroelectric, and geothermal power are) use either coal or nuclear energy for generating electricity. I thought electric cars were supposed to help the environment...plus, some people have criticized the US’ infrastructure for revolving too much around cars. In such a scenario as described above, we’d be building entirely new power plants solely for the purpose of powering cars!

Finally, robocar fans say that anyone who owns an autonomous car would get all kinds of wonderful discounts from their insurance company, while premiums skyrocket for those who refuse to give up their manual car. Sure, they would...at first. Sooner or later, people will release that beyond theft coverage, there’s not much point in requiring insurance for vehicles where no accident could really be blamed on the driver. So they’ll start to lobby the government for an exemption from mandatory car insurance for owners of autonomous cars. Will they get it? Maybe, maybe not, but the prospect of lost business won’t please insurers too much.

What will motoring look like in 20 years? I honestly don’t know. It could look exactly like all I’ve described, drawbacks and all, because if there’s anything mankind is good at, it’s defying me when I say no one would be that stupid. However, if practicality prevails, it’ll probably be something like this:

Frank gets up in the morning after a rough night where he barely slept a wink. He summons his Toyota Camry from his garage in autonomous mode and rides to work while catching up on lost sleep. Across the street, Jess gets in her Dodge Avenger (based on the Giulia platform) and drives herself to work. Her car does have an autonomous mode, as is mandatory for all cars made after the 2029 model year, but she prefers not use it unless she really doesn’t feel like driving. On the interstate, Frank’s Camry flies by Jess in the autonomous only lane as part of a car train moving twice as fast as her and the few other drivers in the manual lanes, but she doesn’t care-she’d rather enjoy the freedom of being in control versus the safety of a computer doing it all for her.

So long story short-autonomous cars: good idea for some, bad idea for everybody.

Disclaimer: I wrote this from an American perspective because I’ve yet to visit another country or even live there for any amount of time. Perhaps in some other countries autocars could work for everyone, but I doubt the automotive enthusiast communities of such countries would take too kindly to the idea...

Daily Drives a Dragon - One Last Lap > CivoLee 03/18/2016 at 00:47

1

100% for sure wouldn’t work at first, and it’s going to be the worst for the first few generations of autonomous cars. When we get to the point where most in a given population haven’t driven a car, then full autonomy might work.

Dr_Doctor > CivoLee 03/18/2016 at 00:53

1

As much as I love driving, I wouldn’t mind having the option to put my car into autonomous mode for the highway portion of my daily commute. Stop and go traffic on 128 in the afternoon is the worst and really isn’t an enjoyable part of driving.

I’ll take manual mode for the winding backroads, around town stuff, and trips when the highway isn't too congested, but a more powerful version of Tesla Autopilot combined with something like BMW Traffic Jam Assist for long-haul highway driving or crappy commutes that aren’t usually enjoyable would be nice.

slipperysallylikespenguins > CivoLee 03/18/2016 at 01:03

2

Completely agree with your post. It will be a slow and long integration, and I honestly don’t think that 100% adoption could happen within the next 80 years. Current technology can’t even handle averse weather. I’m most disturbed by people being so trusting in technology. They act like they have never had a computer or phone glitch or freeze.

Urambo Tauro > CivoLee 03/18/2016 at 01:19

0

I find the technology interesting, exciting, and impressive. But I think that the expectation of a driverless utopia that brings about the end of manually-operated vehicles is a foolish misconception.

Roads have been around for thousands of years, and with the exception of limited-access freeways, they serve as multipurpose avenues of transportation. They can be used by trucks, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, horses, and more.

While limited-access roadways may one day take advantage of driverless technology and offer exclusive lanes for such vehicles, surface streets must always be multi-functional. Just as the prevalence of the automobile has not outlawed the use of horse-drawn carriages, in the same way, autonomobiles will never fully replace our cars.

Eric @ opposite-lock.com > CivoLee 03/18/2016 at 01:46

0

1) Most cars are distinctly under-utilized. On any given day, I spend 20-30 minutes in one of my cars, and that’s a lot more than I used to. If they could make runs, I’d probably have them do it periodically (especially to go get oil and tire changes, which are always inconvenient). I don’t imagine they’ll all fly at extreme speed like claimed above, though, because it is dangerous for a number of reasons. The main savings in time for autonomous cars will actually come from moving smoothly with little-to-no traffic control. Intersections in a completely-autonomous car world will be extremely scary.

2) See the under-utilization above. Beyond that, there’s some variety in schedules. My current situation would be extremely well-served by autonomous cars, though it probably wouldn’t be economically viable any time in the near future due to the low population density. I’d rather not drive in traffic or commute. When I go out driving, I want to go out driving. If I’m not driving a fun road in my car, I’m completely wasting the potential.

3) You need to leave the US. There are quite a few countries where car ownership isn’t even required to lead a very comfortable existence. In these places, driving is a choice and it leads to only the most capable/qualified people driving. If people that don’t have the capacity to drive weren’t forced to drive, our traffic would be far better. Just putting them in autonomous cars would reduce the wear on the infrastructure and make everyone else’s drive better. Think about getting grandma there safely without having to follow a slow-moving land badge with just a puff of blue hair sticking up above the steering wheel. It’s better for her and for us.

I’m hopeful for the graduated licensing that someone posted as an idea. It would be great to be able to strip people that can’t be trusted of their ability to drive without stripping them of their mobility.

I don’t believe that manual car operation will end in my lifetime. Even if most travel is done in autonomous mode in the later years of my life, I can’t see every road being passable in full autonomous mode. We’ll still need to break out that steering wheel and maneuver into some places. We’ll probably have a holographic 3D view and distance sensor feedback when doing it, but it’ll still have to be done by the unusually-adaptable human mind.

Bman76 (no it doesn't need a WS6 hood) M. Arch > CivoLee 03/18/2016 at 02:40

1

For the 2nd issue I’d imagine it’d work like Uber with surge pricing. Using vehicles during peak hours costs more. I also see private car ownership going out the window.

Also, I’d rewrite it as “good idea for all, perceived as a bad idea by a select few”

BvdV - The Dutch Engineer > CivoLee 03/18/2016 at 02:53

0

The development will not go as fast as expected by some so called ‘experts’ say. Some authorities I spoke in the field expect it to take another 50-80 years until fully autonomous vehicles are viable as a primary use of transportation for everyone. The main reason for this is the relatively slow development of sensors and software algorithms.

Old-Busted-Hotness > CivoLee 03/18/2016 at 06:46

1

It’s all about lowering expectations. Riding the bus is a shit experience, so sharing an autobot will be better. Sitting in traffic is shit, so an autobot (shared or not) will be better. Driving on an open road is awesome, so an autobot will suck. Solution: take away the open roads by letting them deteriorate and get overcrowded. Then all driving sucks, and autobots start to look pretty good.

To “encourage” sharing, price autobots so high that only bazillionaires can afford to keep one for their private use. Everyone else gets to ride in vinyl-seated rubber-floor-matted misery with three other people going in more or less the same direction (at least one of which won’t shut up about Jesus, politics, shitty music or how many times he beat off last night).

RacinBob > CivoLee 03/18/2016 at 07:59

0

I think parts will happen soon. I think that there will be peer to peer sharing with driven cars to take some of the workload off of the driverless cars. For example, cars will take the 90th percentile track in any route of the driven cars.

There will be alot of 80's something that want/need mobility but will wan’t the car to do most of the driving. My feeling will be it be assisted driving.

What I don’t see is bad weather autonomous driving for a long while. Also, I wonder how many autonomous cars are driving in really crouded urban centers (Manhatten?)

BigBlock440 > Eric @ opposite-lock.com 03/18/2016 at 08:42

2

The thing with cars sitting is, so what? They don’t degrade and wear out by being parked for a few hours a day. They just sit there until they’re ready to be used. Sure, cars last 11+ years now, when they are sitting around for most of that year, but run them 24/7 and they be at half a million miles inside of a year and have to be replace every 6 months. Also, It doesn’t really make a difference if they’re sitting in a parking lot empty or sitting on a road empty, they’re still taking up real estate, only now they’re increasing congestion and burning more fuel picking somebody else up. The whole “cars are underutilized” argument doesn’t really hold water once you leave New York City.

That's gonna leave a mark! > CivoLee 03/18/2016 at 08:42

1

Please don’t throw the cold water of reality on this idea. Too many people are having a good time dreaming. We can always forecast the future as wonderful because any possible problems we can explain away as being solved with technology.

I don’t know how we will handle the fact that most people will want to go to work at roughly the same time and return at the same time. Saturdays everyone will want to summon a car to do shopping, go to the garden center, out to eat or a movie and so on. Surge pricing? Thanks, I have to pay a premium to go to work on time? Leave at a different time then? Thanks, I already leave 2 hours early to beat the traffic.

Traffic intersections will be a litter faster but still slow. Construction tie ups? They are going to disappear in the future? Walkers, bikers, animals on the roads are also going to disappear?

Don’t worry. Sit back, take another long hit on that thing and dream some more. One day we will even have flying cars!