Car2Go + DriverlessCar + Uber - Better than mass transit someday? (Austin: construction, taxi)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think the biggest hurdles for driverless cars will be political, regulatory and cultural, not technical. (I feel the same way about many other budding technologies, such as Google Glass, Oculus Rift, etc.) I can see certain entities (notably those who feel threatened) spreading FUD about driverless vehicles. And there are a lot of people out there who are just wary of change in general.
Within several decades, I cam see the technology working primarily as a mass rental service, kinda like the taxi industry on a widespread scale. Few people will actually own their driverless cars. Like the OP mentioned, use an app to arrange pickup, dropoff, etc. After the car drops you off at work or whatever, it can go provide service for the next customer. There will be less need for large parking lots in front of every building. In fact, provided people adopt this on a very large scale, it could ultimately lead to fewer cars on the road in general. Cars today spend most of their time parked somewhere instead of in operation.
The tech ideally would be efficient enough so that a vehicle could be ready at a moment's notice for certain cases...for example, your wife is pregnant and just went into labor...you need to get her to the hospital now.
I can also see driverless vehicle becoming popular for shipping (excluding large freight), especially for SMBs and individuals. Instead of making traditional arrangements with UPS, FedEx or USPS, just summon a specially equipped vehicle to transport the cargo directly to the recipient. The vehicle could be equipped with a robot or drone to drop off the package if the recipient isn't home and if it's a safe area.
My biggest technical concern is security. What if one of these things gets remotely hacked, and used for a remote kidnapping or crash? I believe that just about any piece of tech engineered by human hands could be hacked by a different person if he's talented enough.
I still think there will be a place for buses and light rail, though (although I suppose the buses could eventually be driver-less themselves). Those options will probably be more affordable for low-income people.
Agree. But driverless cars will not "solve" the capacity deficit problem, which...again...is the single biggest hurdle we have to cross as a region.
Be careful, also, of telegraphing the message that people will no longer own their own cars, driverless or not. That's one of those thoughts that gets the libertarians all exercised - "Wait...I don't have my OWN car? And the NSA will be tracking all my movements???? My God, Alex Jones was right!"
I have no problem with out of the box thinking; I've done my fair share. But I'm not talking about minor engineering issues that need a little innovation to overcome. I am talking reality - physical laws of the universe. Maybe the manufacturers will pull off some kind of technological miracle to sidestep reality, but I remain skeptical - both of their ability to do that, and their dedication to anything except their bottom line (which is as it should be), which makes them risk-averse and less likely to be playing around with bending time and space for the sake of a better automobile.
I guess we can agree to disagree. Like I said, history is replete with naysayers and their facts and data being proven wrong by the determination of stupid dreamers who didn't know any better. And it's replete with the opposite, scientific thinkers saying "I just don't understand" when something that should have worked, or been successful, doesn't and isn't.
Traffic is choked in Austin, getting worse exponentially, and can't be fixed by an expensive rail system. Why not imagine something different? Driverless cars are a reality, not a far fetched idea. Uber is already here, so is the emerging concept of shared cars. Why wouldn't those three things naturally converge?
I guess we can agree to disagree. Like I said, history is replete with naysayers and their facts and data being proven wrong by the determination of stupid dreamers who didn't know any better. And it's replete with the opposite, scientific thinkers saying "I just don't understand" when something that should have worked, or been successful, doesn't and isn't.
Traffic is choked in Austin, getting worse exponentially, and can't be fixed by an expensive rail system. Why not imagine something different? Driverless cars are a reality, not a far fetched idea. Uber is already here, so is the emerging concept of shared cars. Why wouldn't those three things naturally converge?
Steve
Let's separate out what is being criticized here:
1. Will there be driverless cars and a match with a transport system of some kind one day? Maybe, maybe even likely, but likely not in precisely the way you envision.
2. Would such a service solve traffic congestion?
Not a bit. Hasn't solve geography.
Doesn't matter how advanced the technology is - when you put millions of people in millions of autonomous transportation vehicles you get. . .congestion.
That's it. Nothing you propose solves that equation.
You know what does? It's really simple, works well in just about every city it's been tried - high quality, high capacity transit:
You know what the same number of SDV vehicles would look like? Same as on the left.
Yeah, that'll solve all of our transportation issues. Come on, Steve. Now you're just grasping at straws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by austin-steve
I guess we can agree to disagree. Like I said, history is replete with naysayers and their facts and data being proven wrong by the determination of stupid dreamers who didn't know any better. And it's replete with the opposite, scientific thinkers saying "I just don't understand" when something that should have worked, or been successful, doesn't and isn't.
Traffic is choked in Austin, getting worse exponentially, and can't be fixed by an expensive rail system. Why not imagine something different? Driverless cars are a reality, not a far fetched idea. Uber is already here, so is the emerging concept of shared cars. Why wouldn't those three things naturally converge?
Steve
I'm not arguing for or against convergence, or the Singularity, or technological innovation, or any of the other out of the box ideas that we're seeing today.
Cripes, I feel like I'm talking to a wall here...Uber plus driverless cars will *NOT* address the single biggest transportation issue we face - that there isn't enough capacity to go around. The primary challenge is not how we can be cool, or more cool. It's how do you manage the existing capacity deficit, and how do you address the future, much larger deficit?
We're standing around trying to out-"wouldn't this be cool" each other when the problem is here now. No one wants to engage on that simple fact. They either want to simply throw bombs at everything, wish the growth away, or fetishize technology as if it's a deity that will save us from ourselves.
Yeah, that'll solve all of our transportation issues. Come on, Steve. Now you're just grasping at straws.
I'm not arguing for or against convergence, or the Singularity, or technological innovation, or any of the other out of the box ideas that we're seeing today.
Cripes, I feel like I'm talking to a wall here...Uber plus driverless cars will *NOT* address the single biggest transportation issue we face - that there isn't enough capacity to go around. The primary challenge is not how we can be cool, or more cool. It's how do you manage the existing capacity deficit, and how do you address the future, much larger deficit?
We're standing around trying to out-"wouldn't this be cool" each other when the problem is here now. No one wants to engage on that simple fact. They either want to simply throw bombs at everything, wish the growth away, or fetishize technology as if it's a deity that will save us from ourselves.
I was imagining it as an actual solution, not just something "cool". If the numbers and logistics don't add up, I guess they won't. I'm not going to convince you it will work, and you're not going to convince me it won't, and that's ok. It's simply an idea that came into my head, and it turns out others envision it as well.
I was imagining it as an actual solution, not just something "cool". If the numbers and logistics don't add up, I guess they won't. I'm not going to convince you it will work, and you're not going to convince me it won't, and that's ok. It's simply an idea that came into my head, and it turns out others envision it as well.
Steve
That's great. And in 20 years when none of that materializes and we're still stuck in traffic and just then getting to do the thing we should have done all along and finally get around to building a high quality high capacity transit system at a far higher cost should we just send you a bill for the difference?
Try anywhere from $8.2 million (from TTI) to $16.2 million (TxDOT).
The lane mile calculation I'm guessing you did in your head needs to be doubled, for one lane in either direction. In that case, what you're buying is the ability to transport about 1,900 people per hour in each direction. I don't know what the Urban Rail proposal looks like in terms of capacity, but it's probably fairly comparable to the single lane of highway capacity.
No, sorry. I wish that were true. A survey of highway projects completed in the last ten years showed that even "suburban" lanes miles cost an average of $8.6 million. Besides, I-35 is not a corridor that "don't have anything tricky".
Here's the data:
183A Extension $3,500,000
TX SH 121 $4,439,655
SH 45 SE $5,202,703
183A $5,803,448
US 59 $8,444,444
US 290 - Cypress TX $14,712,121
North Tarrant Expressway $18,518,519
Those are all projects that were done in the past. Generally, construction costs rise over time, so it's very likely that the price is now at least a little higher. So, no more $2 million/lane mile highways. Hasn't been that little for decades.
I love this idea, and I'd like to see it implemented more extensively in Austin. I have to tell you, though, that after over a decade of technological innovation, telecommuting is a flop. It makes up less than 5% of the "commuters" on average in a given city. In recent years, large employers have started to change their minds about telecommuting - Best Buy, Target, Hewlett Packard and Yahoo have all in the recent past required their employees to come into an office somewhere. The value of face to face communication and interaction has risen, not dropped, in response to telecommuting technology improvements.
I notice that you didn't address any of my assertions about driverless cars vis a vis capacity. Care to debate how driverless cars will enhance capacity when there will be an enforced 20 car length distance to the front and rear of any given vehicle at 70 mph? I also answered your question about rail capacity; the least you could do is acknowledge that I seem to know a little about what I'm doing.
Another data point, the Mopac improvement project is 11 miles (so 22 lane-miles) and is costing 200 million (so $9M /lanemile). AND large sections of that are literally just repainting. Adding anything to I35 (especially through the split) is going to be much more complicated ($$$$).
Another data point, the Mopac improvement project is 11 miles (so 22 lane-miles) and is costing 200 million (so $9M /lanemile). AND large sections of that are literally just repainting.
Ah yes, everyone who travels Mopac daily is familiar with all that "just repainting" they are doing.
Ah yes, everyone who travels Mopac daily is familiar with all that "just repainting" they are doing.
What? Yes, there are areas that are being expanded, but for several miles, they are adding no extra pavement, and basically just turning the shoulder into another lane.
What? Yes, there are areas that are being expanded, but for several miles, they are adding no extra pavement, and basically just turning the shoulder into another lane.
Categorizing the Mopac Express lane project as "Largely repainting" and "basically just turning the shoulder into another lane" is very misleading.
Last edited by Debsi; 08-25-2014 at 10:30 PM..
Reason: Personal attack removed
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
