Will Driverless Cars Add Another Color to Australia’s Heat Maps?

FYI, 54 degrees Celsius is 129 degrees Farenheit. Image: ##http://www.wired.com/design/2013/01/australia-temperature-map/##Wired##

Here’s the big news of the day: Autonomous cars are making a big splash at the Consumer Electronics Show right now. Audi is testing its self-driving cars on Nevada roads. Google’s already done it in California. Toyota and Lexus are getting ready too.

Here’s the other big news of the day: The planet’s getting hotter. Australia has had to add a new color to its heat maps. If climate change has an illustrator, it’s the Australian Bureau of Meteorology. If it has a color, it’s pink and purple.

Do these two news items have anything to do with each other? You bet they do, if the driverless car becomes the mass transit of the future (hold the “mass”). This incarnation of personal rapid transit futurism looks to some like a cleaner, safer transportation system. To others, it looks like a senseless replacement of a public transportation system — which, by right, should still have generations of improvement ahead of it — with single-occupancy vehicles. That’s one backward future.

These cars are not fully driverless yet, the carmakers emphasize — Jim Pisz, a Toyota corporate manager, told Wired, “We believe the driver should always be in control of the vehicle.”

Still, CNN ran this headline in the fall: “You won’t need a driver’s license by 2040.”  They quote Azim Eskandarian of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) saying that in a “full-autonomy” case, drivers (maybe “occupants” is a better word) won’t need any special requirements: “People do not need a license to sit on a train or a bus.”

Jarrett Walker wrote the other day on his Human Transit blog that he just doesn’t buy all the driverless car talk. He said fans imagine these vehicles “in the complete imagined future mode.” He says that the fantasy takes place in a more evolved future, but “there is no credible path from here to there.”

But IEEE (via CNN) insists the new, autonomous automobile will need no special infrastructure — not even traffic lights, since the vehicles will be so well coordinated. In fact, since cars can drive closer together at higher speeds in the brave new autonomous-car world, there will be less congestion and we won’t even need as much highway capacity.

Google co-founder Sergey Brin is quoted by NBC News saying, “I think the self driving car can really dramatically improve the quality of life,” and pointing to uses ranging from aiding the blind and ferrying revelers who drank too much to simply making better use of commuting time.

Some say driverless cars will even reduce the scourge of parking in our cities because driverless cars can be shared and once they’re done running one errand they can be sent out on another one. So they’ll always be on the road — which would seem to create more congestion, as they drive alone to get to their passengers.

As Streetsblog reader jd_x commented on a similar story last week, this technology seems to be “the least bang-for-your buck way of improving transit.” Karen Lynn Allen said, “We have to transition away from energy-gobbling private cars, not pretend we can replace them with driverless ones.” And Dave “Paco” Abraham said it all:

The allure of a driverless car is that you can travel nearly door to door without having the burden of operating the vehicle or needing to pay attention to the road. However, that reality already exists. It’s called a bus. When it’s below ground it’s called a train. An added bonus, you don’t even need to find parking for it. Why is this news to people? Mass transit is here and its real. And if we seriously commit to it, we can make it way more useful than any driverless vehicle ever will be.

Amen, Paco.


5 thoughts on Will Driverless Cars Add Another Color to Australia’s Heat Maps?

  1. I am still optimistic that self-driving car technology will have a positive effect for two reasons:

    1) Self-driving car technology makes self driving buses and self-driving shipping possible too, significantly reducing transit costs.  The argument that shipping costs (a large percentage of which are labor like transit) justify expanding highways will be eliminated as the per-hour labor costs are gone.

    2) With the ability to summon any car you might need any time you want, car ownership will plunge and the appeal of alternatives will increase.  Once car-ownership declines, the sunk cost argument that prevents people from changing modes when gas prices spike is also gone.  Being able to fall back to a convenient car in the event your bus/bike/rail trip turns into catastrophe will eliminate the argument about those modes being unreliable.

  2. @0d136e7a3524adff7a4c20d151609f72:disqus  in response to your second point, the people making that argument are ignoring the uneven distribution of demand. If land use patterns don’t change, and everyone still wants to be driven to work by a robot car, it won’t reduce the number of cars required, parking needs, etc. I’ll outsource a more thorough response to Jarrett Walker: http://www.humantransit.org/2013/01/driverless-cars-and-the-limitations-of-the-complete-imagined-future.html
    I’m pretty sure I sound like a loon when I say it, but the ship has already sailed on reducing carbon emissions. Coming to a planet near you in the near future… geoengineering.

  3. Driverless cars aren’t *necessarily* less sustainable than public transit.  The same technology that enables the car to route itself, could also enable the car to work more like transit by picking up more passengers.  Driverless cars could produce a huge boom in carpooling.

    Transpo geeks are probably better to focus on making sure driverless cars are as sustainable as possible, rather than trying to fight them outright.

  4. As a frequent rider of trains and buses in DC, I take issue with the notion that buses and trains are a complete answer. Even in most big cities, buses and trains stop running during late night hours, and can’t offer door-to-door service when needed. Driverless urban transit vehicles can be fully electric, use less power, and as pointed out, don’t need nearly the road capacity or parking facilities. The advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

  5. I am with Fltranspodesk: autonomous cars will present a mode shift from hanging all your transportation needs on a car you paid a lot to own and operate yourself, to a metered service which you can further economize by using autonomous cars as a “last mile” bridge to quality transit services whenever appropriate.  I would not be at all surprised to see forward-thinking transit agencies themselves adopt driverless cars as an extension of the mass transit system to lower-density areas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


How the Self-Driving Car Could Spell the End of Parking Craters

Here’s the rosy scenario of a future where cars drive themselves: Instead of owning cars, people will summon autonomous vehicles, hop in, and head to their destination. With fewer cars to be stored, parking lots and garages will give way to development, eventually bringing down the cost of housing in tight markets through increased supply. […]

Will President Obama Speak for the Transit-Starved Tonight?

President Obama is expected to make a strong push for infrastructure spending during the State of the Union address tonight. Ahead of the address, the Transportation Equity Network organized its members and supporters to write to President Obama, telling their personal stories of why transit funding is crucial to their communities. In all, TEN will deliver […]

The Economist: Don’t Expect Driving Rates to Rise Again

This whole “peak car” may be more than just a sustainability nut’s fantasy. We’ve seen time after time that young people are souring on car culture and finding other ways to get around and connect with friends. We know that the suburban sprawl that fueled the rise of the automobile is in decline. And now […]

Will Memphis Rise to the Transit Challenge?

A few months ago, I went to Memphis for a wedding. I asked the people at my downtown hotel how I should get to the venue, which was also downtown, on South Main Street. They told me it would be about a ten-minute drive. Which let me know it couldn’t be that far away. The […]

How Transit Pays for the Automobile’s Sins

Tony Dutzik is a senior policy analyst with the Frontier Group. An op-ed in Friday’s Washington Post by three professors of urban planning rained on the parade of transit advocates celebrating a new 57-year high in transit ridership. Ridership, the authors wrote, has actually fallen on a per-capita basis since 2008 (as has driving, by the way), as well as outside […]