TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC
Start a Discussionhttps://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/tags/

Great overview of the (potential) implications of self-driving

Discussion in 'Autonomous Vehicles' started by voyager, Jan 28, 2017.

  1. voyager

    voyager Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2009
    Messages:
    589
    Location:
    Amsterdam, Netherlands
    I pick the ones most quintessential and interesting, IMO. The author mentioned fifty.

    1. Transportation-as-a-service; no or less car ownership.

    2. Vehicle designs will change radically . The new players in vehicle design and manufacturing will be a mix of companies like Uber, Google and Amazon and companies you don’t yet know.

    3. Consumers will have more money as transportation gets much cheaper and public transportation like.

    4. Multi-modal transportation will become much more common and further open up mobility.

    5. Roads will be much emptier and smaller (over time) as self-driving cars need much less space between them (a major cause of traffic today).

    6. There will be no more DUI/OUI offenses. Restaurants and bars will sell more alcohol.

    7. Innovative app-like marketplaces will open up for in-transit purchases, ranging from concierge services to food to merchandise to education to entertainment purchases.

    8. Hacking of vehicles will be a serious issue.

    9. Mobility for seniors and people with disabilities will be greatly improved. Parents will have more options to move around their kids on their own. Premium secure end-to-end children’s transport services will likely emerge.

    10. Pollution levels will come down dramatically. Even more people will move to the cities. Productivity levels will go up. Fortunes will be made as these changes happen.

    50 mind-blowing implications of driverless cars – Startup Grind
     
  2. voyager

    voyager Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2009
    Messages:
    589
    Location:
    Amsterdam, Netherlands
    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny x 1
  3. mblakele

    mblakele radial cross member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2016
    Messages:
    546
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    I think that could also go the other way, but it depends on what we mean by "cities". Are we talking about dense urban cores, or sprawling metropolitan areas?

    Either way I'd agree that the proportion of people living in rural areas will continue to decline. But I think we'll continue to see growth in metropolitan sprawl, while urban re-densification will fall in and out of fashion. I know we've seen some re-densification in the recent past, but only in limited areas. Nationally, at the same time, houses keep getting bigger and sprawl keeps on growing. Over a wider historical span people seem to sprawl out whenever possible, using whatever technology is affordable at the time: horse-drawn buses, streetcars, commuter rail, and private autos. Self-driving cars may turn out to be the next step in that journey, enabling even more sprawl.
     
  4. WannabeOwner

    WannabeOwner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2015
    Messages:
    1,379
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I'm probably being thick ... but I don't get this:

    "Roads will be much emptier and smaller (over time) as self-driving cars need much less space between them (a major cause of traffic today)"

    Apart from carpooling (which I am not sure will be a huge deal - will everyone want to share space, in a car, with strangers?) I don't see how self driving cars will make roads emptier. Drive closer together? Maybe, but there are plenty of idiots on the road already driving at that follow-distance. Sure, no accidents and traffic flowing more smoothly, but does that create "Roads will be much emptier"

    "Roads will wear out much more slowly with fewer vehicle miles, lighter vehicles (with less safety requirements)"

    I don't get the "fewer vehicle miles" bit. Currently I get in my car and drive to work. Park it there. Get in and drive home. In the future the car will have to drive to my home (perhaps from not very far away. maybe from a long way away) to pick me up, then do my normal journey, then drive to the next "fare", and then same again when I go home - car will drive to my work place, take me home, and drive from my home to the next "job". That sounds like more miles to me (unless I fill up the car with car pool folk). Is "Most estimates suggest that there will be many fewer vehicles (1/10th as many perhaps) on the road in a driverless world" confusing physical vehicles, with much higher utilisation, with "fewer miles driven"?

    If car-pooling IS the answer then surely all self driving vehicles will need to be mini-buses ...

    "Cities will become much more dense as fewer roads and vehicles will be needed "

    Why fewer roads? Why fewer vehicles? Same number of people will be in transit (plus a bunch or vehicles will be travelling empty to their next "ride"). Unless this relies on the carpooling thing again?

    Maybe its all the out-of-work people the articles lists, who won't be travelling anywhere ... Traffic Police, car financiers, car insurers, car accessory suppliers / sellers, car dealers, car ad workers, taxi and truck drivers, trucker-stop restaurants, ambulance chasing lawyers,

    "Local transport of nearly everything will become ubiquitous and cheap"
    "Person to person movement of goods will become cheaper and open up new markets" - self-driving Nimber perhaps ...

    I'm not getting the "cheap" bit. Perhaps better utilisation of the vehicles creates that opportunity? If I buy a car I tie up that capital, releasing that will be great, but its a one-time-win (OK, I suppose I win on the "financing cost" and "opportunity cost" forever), but if I buy a ride, each time I go anywhere, that company will be making a profit and thus there will be a cost associated with that ride which i don't think will be hugely cheaper (if at all) than at present.

    I feel sure I'm massively overlooking something :oops:
     
  5. gregincal

    gregincal Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,071
    Location:
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Wow, you only have ever bought one car? Cars are a continuously depreciating expense. Buying a car that sits around doing nothing for a huge percentage of it's life is really wasteful. I do believe transportation will become much cheaper with self driving cars, and the elimination of places to store all the unused vehicles (i.e. parking) will also be a huge win. In addition stuff like deliveries that currently requires paying a human driver will definitely get cheaper.

    However, I agree that I don't get the fewer miles driven or why carpooling would be any more popular. People could potentially share Uber rides today with other people, why would a self driving Uber service make it any more likely?
     
  6. WannabeOwner

    WannabeOwner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2015
    Messages:
    1,379
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Indeed, but the way I see it: compared to my private-ownership the fleet-owner will spread depreciation over a much higher utilisation, therefore lower fixed-cost-per-ride, but they will also add on their profit. So I figure my current owner-depreciation + running-cost will be similar to ride-cost when I stop owning a car and use a self-driving service instead. Low mileage drivers will benefit more than high mileage driver as they are starting with poor utilisation of their capital asset.

    I will save the capital cost, but I can only do that once - when I switch from car-owner to ride-buyer. I'm a high mileage driver (25K p.a.) so my view is no doubt coloured in that direction!
     
  7. Tozla

    Tozla Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2017
    Messages:
    135
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    I like the idea of being able to monetize my car when I am not using it. I assume companies like Uber and others will eventually go driverless and until they have their own fleet of self driving cars they will utilize the already existing self driving cars making my car a high end Uber car to drive around drunk kids. On second thoughts .... Do these cars self clean?
     
  8. SDRick

    SDRick Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    637
    Location:
    SD CA United States
    Significant changes, absolutely. All positive, probably not.

    For one, rush hour could potentially be made worse. The way I see it, you would still have the same number of people needing to get to work. Currently, once at work the car is parked. With autonomous driving, theoretically, the car goes out to pick up their next passenger. Now you have more cars during rush hour on the road (some even empty) and not in their respective parking space.
     
  9. mblakele

    mblakele radial cross member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2016
    Messages:
    546
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Autonomous vehicles should be able to make better use of road capacity. If vehicles are empty during peak hours that means no one wants to go in that direction. So they must be going against the main flow, which means they're using otherwise underutilized roads. Groups of vehicles should be able to cooperate to smooth out traffic. Vehicles should be able to platoon with nearly zero following distance. Autonomy should make it easier to increase vehicle occupancy with carpools. Software can match you up with nearby drivers headed to nearby destinations, and there's no fear of getting stuck like there is with a human-driver carpool. Your schedule changed? You need to run an errand mid-day? Summon a vehicle and go.

    Even so, there will be something like surge pricing. Some people will pay it, while others will make tradeoffs to avoid it. People do that anyway, but they trade off time spent in traffic rather than cash. Putting a cash value on the problem should encourage more people to think about how to make schedules more flexible.
     
  10. WannabeOwner

    WannabeOwner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2015
    Messages:
    1,379
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    All good points but I'm sceptical on a few

    Agreed, but to first of all get into the "going out of town" lane they will contribute to the traffic in town, where it is both (to my mind) densest and also the cause of the tailbacks / slowdown of traffic trying to get into town

    I get that too, but what happens when "something happens". If the first one hits the brakes and also announces "I'm hitting the brakes" to all the other car, then in theory they all slow down simultaneously, but surely can't all slow down at an absolutely identical rate? which to my mind means that they do need "some" follow distance to absorb the difference. Maybe that will be a second, which is less than currently recommended for manual drivers but nonetheless adopted as "standard" by many manual drivers!! so that would mean no/little difference in follow distance.

    Agreed again, but I'm sceptical that people will want to vehicle share - unless the vehicle is a bus / mini-bus (which might actually be the answer to rush hour traffic - fewer vehicles but multi-seat with high occupancy - but then won't they be a bit limited in usage the rest of the, less busy, hours? more kWh moving mini-buses around than smaller vehicles)

    Don't know how often it happens, maybe not much, but currently if my wife and I want to independently go to A and B (i.e. 2 sides of a triangle) I might drive to A and drop her off, and then continue to B. With AutoRide I expect we will summon two separate rides instead.
     

Share This Page