happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,886
|
Post by happyhoix on May 7, 2015 8:51:37 GMT -5
It isn't accurate that everyone working downtown only comes in at 8 am and drives back out at 5 Pm. there is a lot of other traffic, for other reasons.
Say you need a ride to town and you need to be there at eight. The car drops you off and goes to get someone who needs to be at work at 9. Then goes out to the suburb to pick up someone who needs to come in to a meeting at 11. Then picks up two guys from an office who want to go to lunch across town. Then takes the guy from the meeting back to his office in the suburbs, then takes the two guys back to the office from lunch, then takes a guy out to the airport from downtown, then brings in a second shift worker to downtown, then picks you up to take you home again. All those actions previously would have required lots of cars - now just one would handle all of it.
Then add to that the fact that, if these cars had dedicated lanes with protection from the other lanes of traffic, they could drive at very high speeds - say 100 mph - and keep only inches of space from each other (because they would all be driving at exactly the same speed, and all communicating with each other about their location on the road, as well as when they plan to get on or off the road). Add in the factor that they won't have accidents (as long as the non-smart cars can't veer off into their lanes) so you don't get the prolonged congestion a big accident generates, and you can imagine how much faster rush hour would be over.
I think initially cities would change their HOV lanes into protected lanes for self driving cars, just one lane each direction, but gradually, as the cars become more affordable and big car sharing services spring up (which will be especially attractive to elderly people nervous about driving on their own) two or three lanes will become high speed smart car lanes, leaving 1 or 2 lanes for the trucks and for the people who still like to drive their own cars.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,464
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on May 7, 2015 9:11:32 GMT -5
Musical Interlude
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,704
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
Member is Online
|
Post by Opti on May 7, 2015 9:30:02 GMT -5
I think it all remains to be seen. The cost of rides will impact usage as will however insurance coverage, accidents, missed pickups, etc. are dealt with.
Since we are not a communist country where this is paid and covered by all the people, thinking it will look like today is highly unlikely to me. Reducing the number of cars, reduces the profit of car companies. Currently busses operate on schedules and they are not always on time. Taxis are expensive and can be early, late or on time.
Not sure why people think the expense thing is going to work out so easily that it will be cheaper to not have a car and that adoption of smart cars will be quick and easy. Solar cars haven't taken off, BMW's H20 car didn't catch on. Battery driven cars are making inroads but most people are worried about the huge cost of replacing the battery. Tesla and Prius are admired but not something owned by everyman.
Smart car utopia is likely to fail or succeed on pricing and issues like timeliness and who's at fault in accidents. Is one car better for driving 500 miles a day if your portion is only 50? If keeping your old car is cheaper because you take too many trips at lunch or stop at too many stores on the way home?
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,886
|
Post by happyhoix on May 7, 2015 14:10:48 GMT -5
Driverless cars, at least initially, will be extremely expensive. At first, the only way to use one would be either to be very rich, or to become a member of a group that shares cars, and I can see those types of groups going from the ultra swanky, which would provide you with a new car for as long as you need it, for your individual use, to the budget minded, which would require you to share rides with strangers and maybe wait longer for a pick up, especially during busy times of the day.
So for a while, if you don't like the idea of sharing a car, and you aren't rich, you're going to stick with driving yourself in your nonsmart car. Maybe in 20 - 30 years, as the technology improves and gets cheaper, it might get to a point where everyone can afford to own their own smart car, but it will take a while. And even then, I can see people using the smart cars for urban commutes or long trips, but keeping a non smart car for suburban driving around home.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,886
|
Post by happyhoix on May 7, 2015 14:19:35 GMT -5
I don't think smart cars will catch on quickly because of the price. But, like with most technologies, if it's something people want, businesses will compete to both improve the cars and reduce the costs. I think smart trucks might catch on faster, actually. If you eliminate the truck driver and the limit on how many hours the driver can legally drive, you could keep your trucks moving almost constantly, with the driver on break in the sleeping compartment for the whole trip, and no limit to how many hours he can be on the road. Plus you would reduce the liability of your driver falling asleep at the wheel or making an error in driving that would cost your company big bucks in a lawsuit. I think the big trucking companies will quickly see an increase in profits switching to smart trucks. And imagine if the trucks were mandated to stay in the right hand lane - never having to come up behind an 18 wheeler driving 45 up a hill, trying to pass a truck doing 30.
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 6,987
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on May 7, 2015 17:01:13 GMT -5
I think we would see a quick adoption in retirement communities as people age and have more trouble driving. My dad is 77 and just bought a new Subaru last month; I am hoping his next vehicle can be self driving. At first I was just hoping it would be available for me before my eye sight goes, but now I am more optimistic and think my parents have a shot at it as well. I am sure they would spare no expense to retain the ability to go out shopping, dancing and attend community dinners.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 13:21:46 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2015 17:47:17 GMT -5
I see the adoption of "smart / self driving" cars within a few years. I don't see us giving up our individual cars for some sort of mass-transit-vehicle-swarm system though.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on May 7, 2015 20:10:25 GMT -5
I think it all remains to be seen. The cost of rides will impact usage as will however insurance coverage, accidents, missed pickups, etc. are dealt with.
Since we are not a communist country where this is paid and covered by all the people, thinking it will look like today is highly unlikely to me. Reducing the number of cars, reduces the profit of car companies. Currently busses operate on schedules and they are not always on time. Taxis are expensive and can be early, late or on time.
Not sure why people think the expense thing is going to work out so easily that it will be cheaper to not have a car and that adoption of smart cars will be quick and easy. Solar cars haven't taken off, BMW's H20 car didn't catch on. Battery driven cars are making inroads but most people are worried about the huge cost of replacing the battery. Tesla and Prius are admired but not something owned by everyman.
Smart car utopia is likely to fail or succeed on pricing and issues like timeliness and who's at fault in accidents. Is one car better for driving 500 miles a day if your portion is only 50? If keeping your old car is cheaper because you take too many trips at lunch or stop at too many stores on the way home?
I was skeptical about the cost as well for an "on demand" car service. I can easily put 150,000 miles on a car in a ten year timeframe, and I know others can put even more. Even if a car service like a driverless Uber can do it for as cheaply as 50 cents a mile, that's still $75,000 for 150,000 miles. I can get a good car for less than $30k. And yeah, I'd have to pay for gas, but I doubt I'd pay as much as $40k+ for gas over ten years.
Let's be conservative. If I buy 1 tank of a gas a week at $35.00, that's $1,820.00 a year in gas. Over the proposed 10 year lifespan, that's $18,200.00. So the total cost to own for gas and the car is $30,000+$18,200=$48,200. Just add oil changes and routine maintenance (I don't know, few hundred dollars a year?) and you still aren't anywhere close to $75,000.
I guess it all depends on how much you drive if an on demand car service is worth it.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 7, 2015 21:24:05 GMT -5
10 years and 150K will likely cost more than just routine maintenance. But of course it depends on the situation- just like electric cars are perfect for some people and will not work for others. Also- don't have to have insurance either- so there is maybe another 10K or more depending what you buy.
Pretty much depends on where you live I guess.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on May 7, 2015 21:41:04 GMT -5
I think it all remains to be seen. The cost of rides will impact usage as will however insurance coverage, accidents, missed pickups, etc. are dealt with.
Since we are not a communist country where this is paid and covered by all the people, thinking it will look like today is highly unlikely to me. Reducing the number of cars, reduces the profit of car companies. Currently busses operate on schedules and they are not always on time. Taxis are expensive and can be early, late or on time.
Not sure why people think the expense thing is going to work out so easily that it will be cheaper to not have a car and that adoption of smart cars will be quick and easy. Solar cars haven't taken off, BMW's H20 car didn't catch on. Battery driven cars are making inroads but most people are worried about the huge cost of replacing the battery. Tesla and Prius are admired but not something owned by everyman.
Smart car utopia is likely to fail or succeed on pricing and issues like timeliness and who's at fault in accidents. Is one car better for driving 500 miles a day if your portion is only 50? If keeping your old car is cheaper because you take too many trips at lunch or stop at too many stores on the way home?
I was skeptical about the cost as well for an "on demand" car service. I can easily put 150,000 miles on a car in a ten year timeframe, and I know others can put even more. Even if a car service like a driverless Uber can do it for as cheaply as 50 cents a mile, that's still $75,000 for 150,000 miles. I can get a good car for less than $30k. And yeah, I'd have to pay for gas, but I doubt I'd pay as much as $40k+ for gas over ten years.
Let's be conservative. If I buy 1 tank of a gas a week at $35.00, that's $1,820.00 a year in gas. Over the proposed 10 year lifespan, that's $18,200.00. So the total cost to own for gas and the car is $30,000+$18,200=$48,200. Just add oil changes and routine maintenance (I don't know, few hundred dollars a year?) and you still aren't anywhere close to $75,000.
I guess it all depends on how much you drive if an on demand car service is worth it.
Interestingly enough, the current cost of driving a car is $0.56/mile according to the IRS. So in theory charging people 0.50/mile is cheaper than owning. Although it is an average so some pay more and some pay less. Insurance - I pay around $100 per month personally. So that adds $12k. Then if you ever have to pay parking that can add up. I know it is also around $100/month to park in a garage in my city. That is totally location dependent though. It is all going to be dependent on a lot of personal factors. Like the fact you intend to keep a car for 150k miles. A lot of people like new cars and would have replaced that car 5 years in, spending closer to $50k on vehicles when you account for some resale value. At the end of the day, if it doesn't economically make sense then it won't happen. But since we already have zipcars in a lot of major cities, there is clearly some portions of the population interested in not owning cars. This just takes the whole thing one step further.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on May 7, 2015 22:00:51 GMT -5
I think it all remains to be seen. The cost of rides will impact usage as will however insurance coverage, accidents, missed pickups, etc. are dealt with.
Since we are not a communist country where this is paid and covered by all the people, thinking it will look like today is highly unlikely to me. Reducing the number of cars, reduces the profit of car companies. Currently busses operate on schedules and they are not always on time. Taxis are expensive and can be early, late or on time.
Not sure why people think the expense thing is going to work out so easily that it will be cheaper to not have a car and that adoption of smart cars will be quick and easy. Solar cars haven't taken off, BMW's H20 car didn't catch on. Battery driven cars are making inroads but most people are worried about the huge cost of replacing the battery. Tesla and Prius are admired but not something owned by everyman.
Smart car utopia is likely to fail or succeed on pricing and issues like timeliness and who's at fault in accidents. Is one car better for driving 500 miles a day if your portion is only 50? If keeping your old car is cheaper because you take too many trips at lunch or stop at too many stores on the way home?
Reducing the number of cars isn't good long term for car companies, but being the first to offer a self-driving car would mean huge profits. Being the company that gets a patent on the technology would be huge. The fact that virtually every car company is working on some version of this should tell you that it is coming. You've even got non-car companies like Google and NASA in on the game. This isn't going to be an overnight change, but a slow trend. We are already at the point where cars have tons of technology that helps us drive. Cars beep if we stray from our lane, cars brake automatically when we are sliding, a light flashes if someone is in our blind spot, backup cameras, cars that park themselves. People see them as safety features, but there are all small steps towards cars doing more and more of the hard work. At some point it will flip so that cars are actually doing most of the driving and we just assist. Some of the change is going to be govt mandated. Right now NHTSA is working on mandating that all vehicles have the vehicle to vehicle communication capabilities by 2020. That alone is a huge step towards self-driving cars.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,704
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
Member is Online
|
Post by Opti on May 7, 2015 22:50:16 GMT -5
Angel it is going to be a slow change. I think the average car on the road in NJ is 10 years old so my car like many does not have the cool backup camera or light that flashes when someone is in your blind spot.
I read about the Google car. It doesn't do driveways and complicated interchanges. I guess I was thinking you all were talking about cars doing all the driving, because I just don't see that coming that soon. I do hope it will improve and remove most of the discrepencies intentional and otherwise from the maps.
Slightly OT, post office driver was telling me how they were trying to map routes using Google. In some cases the maps are totally incorrect and in others you really need to know the area and traffic to know how unlikely some of the routes he told me about were. I think one was driving on a ramp that wasn't finished yet.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on May 7, 2015 23:53:11 GMT -5
We are talking about cars doing all the driving someday, but that is a long way off. Before that we are going to see something more like the Google car that does most of the driving. Before that we are going to see cars with cruise control that also can steer, but will only stay in a single lane and won't do turns. Which leads to where we are now - you still have to steer, but smart cruise control is available in many cars where the car will speed up and slow down based on traffic ahead.
Step by step we will get closer. It may take decades, but I'm willing to bet that we see cars driving without a driver in my lifetime.
|
|
truthbound
Familiar Member
Joined: Mar 1, 2014 6:01:51 GMT -5
Posts: 814
|
Post by truthbound on May 8, 2015 5:58:28 GMT -5
As do most non Millennials.
|
|
ChiTownVenture
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 10:39:06 GMT -5
Posts: 648
|
Post by ChiTownVenture on May 8, 2015 10:36:31 GMT -5
I think it all remains to be seen. The cost of rides will impact usage as will however insurance coverage, accidents, missed pickups, etc. are dealt with.
Since we are not a communist country where this is paid and covered by all the people, thinking it will look like today is highly unlikely to me. Reducing the number of cars, reduces the profit of car companies. Currently busses operate on schedules and they are not always on time. Taxis are expensive and can be early, late or on time.
Not sure why people think the expense thing is going to work out so easily that it will be cheaper to not have a car and that adoption of smart cars will be quick and easy. Solar cars haven't taken off, BMW's H20 car didn't catch on. Battery driven cars are making inroads but most people are worried about the huge cost of replacing the battery. Tesla and Prius are admired but not something owned by everyman.
Smart car utopia is likely to fail or succeed on pricing and issues like timeliness and who's at fault in accidents. Is one car better for driving 500 miles a day if your portion is only 50? If keeping your old car is cheaper because you take too many trips at lunch or stop at too many stores on the way home?
I'm not so sure that it will be a slow change and that the expense will be that high. Car sharing in major cities (like Chicago) is working well. I don't have a car because I am able to rely on public transportation. When I do need a car I have a membership to I-Go (now Enterprise Car Share). I use I-Go at least once a week. I make a reservation and the car is ready for my allotted time. My cost of I-Go per month is cheaper than owning a car (car payment, insurance, parking, etc). I think this will be something that is put in place and will quickly escalate (at least in major cities). I see this working similarly.
|
|