Tag Archives: self-driving cars

NYT and Cutting Edge Transportation

Leave a reply

There was a time when I thought that if the New York Times told me something, it must be true. Like there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, for example. I am a bit more skeptical these days, and I thank the New York Times for opening my eyes to seeking out more diverse sources of news. Still, they have suddenly noticed that autonomous cars and ride sharing are happening, and I think they may be on to something! I just hope these things are not like beards, which are now officially uncool because the New York Times has called them a trend.

autonomous truck

Leave a reply

With all the talk of self-driving cars, I figured self-driving trucks and buses wouldn’t be far behind. And here is a self-driving truck, already licensed in a few U.S. states. It sounds like there is still a human driver in it for now. But in the long term, I imagine this is bad news for human driver as an occupation. It should be good news for the safety of humans on the road in general. It seems like it could favor the economics of road freight vs. rail. Then again, it might make much narrower travel lanes practical, leaving plenty of room in the right of way for other infrastructure like high speed rail, high voltage lines, pipelines, etc. Time will tell.

February 2015 in Review

Leave a reply

This blog got 173 hits in February! Pretty cool, considering I really just meant it as a place to collect my own scattered thoughts and refer back to them later. If 173 out of the 6 billion people out there like it, I am flattered. Okay, I understand there may have been a few repeat visitors. Also, judging from the most popular posts, there is one thing I mention occasionally that people really like: robots!

Negative trends and predictions:

  • Fresh Air had an interview with Elizabeth Kolbert, author of The Sixth Extinction. The idea here is that what humans are doing to other species is equivalent in scope to events that have killed off most life on Earth in the past.
  • The drought in the western U.S. continues to grind on.
  • There are some depressing new books out there about all the bad things that could happen to the world, from nuclear terrorism to pandemics. Also a “financial black hole”, a “major breakdown of the Internet”, “the underpopulation bomb”, the “death of death”, and more!
  • Government fragmentation explains at least part of suburban sprawl and urban decline in U.S. states, with Pennsylvania among the worst.

Positive trends and predictions:

  • Libraries are starting to go high-tech using warehouse robot technology.
  • I had a rambling post on technologies to watch: carbon fiber, the internet of things, self-driving cars and trucks, biotechnology for everything from carbon sequestration to cancer treatment to agriculture, and of course more automation, robots, and artificial intelligence. And yes, Clark W. Griswold’s cereal varnish is a real thing!
  • U.S. utility solar capacity is slowly ramping up.
  • A new study suggests a sudden, catastrophic climate tipping point may not be too likely.
  • Robots can independently develop new drugs.
  • According to Google, self-driving taxis are only 2-5 years away.
  • Complex ecosystems can be designed.
  • Compost toilets may save the world…if we can get over the ick factor and the sawdust problem.
  • There are lots of cheap new options for the aspiring high-tech handymen (and women and children) among us. Even better news, we may have reached the point where if you build a robot with your kid in the basement, and he then tells other kids about it, he might not get beat up on the playground.
  • New York City has some good examples of green stormwater infrastructure integrated in sidewalk and street design.

One thing that strikes me is that we keep hearing about biotechnology, but we haven’t seen big, obvious impacts in most of our daily lives yet. I suspect biotechnology is like computers and robots in the 70s, 80s, and 90s – slow but steady progress was being made in the background, the pressure was building, and then the wave suddenly broke onto the commercial and public consciousness. I suspect biotechnology is the next big wave that is going to break.

driverless vehicles and displacement of drivers

Leave a reply

Here is a continuation of the Economist‘s musings about automation:

The possibility of a world in which a rather large share of the population works as drivers, simply because human labour has gotten too cheap to automate out of the job, should focus minds on the nature of the policy challenge economies are beginning to face. Is work—and the link between work and the earning of an income sufficient to live on—so important to society that we should want millions of people to function as meatware: doing jobs sensors and computers could and would do if only there were not an excess supply of humans needing to work in order to afford food and shelter?

That’s not a rhetorical question. It’s a genuine puzzle that societies will find themselves confronting in coming decades. It will be obvious to many people that the answer is no and just as obvious to many others that the answer is yes. I cannot begin to say which side will win the argument.

The idea is that as automated vehicle technology becomes more effective and inexpensive, it will start to put more drivers out of work. But having more drivers available will reduce wages for drivers, possibly below what the automated technology costs and reducing the incentive for further development of the technology. It’s logical, but this sort of thing must have happened throughout history, and technology tends to win even if it takes a while. Take agricultural technology like diesel-powered tractors – when they got cheaper and more effective, they put enormous numbers of agricultural workers out of work. For the most part, those people didn’t accept lower wages and continue as agricultural workers, they migrated and tried to find better jobs in manufacturing, jobs that were also unfortunately drying up due to globalization and automation. The result, in the U.S. at least, was formation of a (seemingly, so far) permanent new underclass. So not only are these issues about technology vs. jobs, they are about how (whether) the wealth created by the new technology is going to be shared throughout society. In theory, we could retrain people and better educate their children, while also working less and sharing income more broadly. But that doesn’t sound like the American way, does it?

self-driving cars and urban form

Leave a reply

Next City has a couple good articles about what self-driving cars may mean for land use and urban form.

How will roadways, sidewalks, intersections, signage, traffic signals, and the relationship between buildings, roadways, pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles change?

The answer to that question is in picture form, so you have to click on the link to see it. The second article explains it in words:

There is much to recommend in this imagined world of cheap, ubiquitous drone taxis. This is a world where senior citizens, the disabled, young people and the inebriated can enjoy safer mobility and be freed from the enormous costs of owning and insuring a car. It’s also a world wherein parked cars have a smaller footprint. In 2010, researchers at the University of California, Berkley released a study on the country’s parking infrastructure. While conceding that assessments of the number of parking paces have varied significantly, they cited a series of estimates, from which we can draw a reasonable range. Following this data, current parking codes have made it so there are between three and eight parking spaces for each of the 250 million cars in America. Think about it this way: If the number of personal cars dropped and parking provisions were loosened, as many as 675 million parking spaces, particularly those in urban cores, could be turned into something else — housing, parks or a million other uses more desirable than street-deadening parking lots.

“If you could push all the land currently devoted to parking in Manhattan and Boston and other big cities 10 minutes outside the city limits,” says Anthony Townsend, author of Smart Cities, “you’re potentially talking about trillions of dollars worth of real estate that could be developed, and tens of millions of new city-dwellers who could be accommodated.”

Well, sure we can turn some of it into homes and businesses. But let’s turn some of it into parks and habitat and even farms too.