September 21, 2016

Twinning Tweets: Driving out the humans

Two items that landed in the box.  First, from Business in Vancouver:
Report calls for dedicated lanes for self-driving cars between Vancouver, Seattle
A report released Monday (September 19) from a group of Seattle-based tech experts suggests autonomous vehicles are needed to better link their city’s economy to their northern neighbours.

autoThe report is pushing for the creation of dedicated traffic lanes for autonomous vehicles throughout the 225-kilometre stretch of highway between Seattle and Vancouver.

… the report suggests that within 10-15 years, self-driving cars would supplant existing vehicles along the I-5/Highway 99 corridor. Human-driven cars would not be permitted on highways except for times when there is little congestion such as weekends or between 8 p.m. and 4 a.m. on weekdays.

 
From the New York Times:
Here’s a question I’m hoping comes up at Monday’s presidential debate: Secretary Clinton and Mr. Trump, what would you do about self-driving trucks?
According to the boosters, autonomous trucks would avert lots of accidents, saving thousands of lives annually. They could reduce congestion and carbon emissions by cutting the number of trucks on the road, as each truck would never have to sleep. In the short-to-midrange future — before they are good enough to dispense with a human driver entirely — they may make the job of driving a truck far more comfortable and enjoyable than it is today. And they could also slash the cost of interstate transit, possibly sparking wider economic prosperity. …
In the long run, if the trucks prove successful and our logistics infrastructure adjusts to accommodate them, they could begin to displace the three million Americans (mostly men) who now drive trucks for a living, not to mention truck stops and the small towns that depend on them. …
How Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton think about autonomous trucks is in some ways a test case for their ideas about technology generally. It might reveal how they would weigh the benefits of innovation — which usually accrue diffusely to the nation at large — against the particular burdens borne by a small group (the truck drivers who might lose their jobs, in this case).
 

PT: The question could equally apply to our leaders in Canada, where the job-loss estimate, for all kinds of driverless vehicles, tops well over 100,000.
Think about just dumping tens of thousands of low-skilled aging men out of work, with little prospect of retraining for similarly paying jobs, and imagine what the social and political consequences would be.  Actually, Trumpism gives you a pretty good idea.  
There is also the question of wealth inequality and redistribution as transportation services get increasingly concentrated among a handful of ever-more-powerful service providers who control and integrate an many modes as possible – all with the intent of delabouring trucking, transit, taxis, etc.  

This is not a recipe for social stability.  Political leaders would be crazy to unleash these forces without preparing for the consequences.

Posted in

Support

If you love this region and have a view to its future please subscribe, donate, or become a Patron.

Share on

Comments

  1. We shall see.
    I’ve been told in the 1980’s that speech recognition will replace almost all typing and hand operated controls. My car yesterday didn’t even recognize “phone Dave” yesterday and said “pardon” 3 times.
    We don’t even have Uber yet.
    As such I think the vision is right, but not the timeframe of 10-15 years. Maybe 25-30.
    Electric cars too are not new. They ave existed over 100 years.Henry Ford, who was working for Thomas Edison before he opened the Ford motor company was fiddling with e-cars already. He soon realized the serious range constraints due to heavy battery weight and decided to focus on gasoline cars instead. http://jalopnik.com/5564999/the-failed-electric-car-of-henry-ford-and-thomas-edison

  2. Well, it does show that if they could have robots making products and vending machines selling them they would. No pesky employees to have to pay, I understand but then how would customers have any money to buy these products if there are no jobs?

  3. With the exception of intercity commercial trucking, we’ll still need a highly subsidized road system that consumes a lot of land for the car commuters. That will not be sustainable in the long run.

  4. A rail link won’t be needed if an autonomous vehicle highway between Vancouver and Seattle becomes a reality.
    If this is happening so quickly then the Vancouver Broadway corridor should also be reconsidered. If a reasonably priced autonomous car is just around the corner, so to speak, then this could be just what people will want for travel to UBC.
    All that will happen if both autonomous vehicles roads infrastructure and rail is built is that it will become means driven. The poor will travel by rail. The middle class and up will travel in their own vehicle, with full connectivity to communications and media and their own preferences for temperature and sound, refreshments, etc.

    1. An autonomous car can not go as fast as high speed train. Also consider that PRT or personal rapid transit like skytran is also about to be developed that will be very disruptive.

      1. Then distance and the number of stops becomes more important. Say you live in the West End, you travel first to the station (20 mins) and board the train (15 mins) before departure. Then the train stops in Bellingham (15 mins) then you arrive in Seattle. Get out the station and find transport to and travel to your destination (30 mins).
        The fast train trip might be only be a hour and twenty minutes for the 230 km, with the building up to speed, twice and the deceleration and stopping.
        Total travel time: 2hr 40mins.
        Google is quoting 3hr, right now. Twenty minutes longer by your own vehicle.
        Not a slam dunk.

        1. Plus price is far too high and population density too low. They also tried Calgary – Edmonton (similar distance).
          This might work better, in case you can’t afford one of Elon Musk’s Teslas, but maybe his high speed tube dubbed “Hyperloop” at 800-1200 km/h is for you at $100 per trip ? http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/08/12/hyperloop-elon-musks-vision-for-air-travel-might-be-crazy-or-it-might-be-the-future/#74d6d0017058 or here https://s.yimg.com/fz/api/res/1.2/lU8yfztw_S9KyUqL_3oeuQ–/YXBwaWQ9c3JjaGRkO2g9MzY0O3E9OTU7dz01NDU-/http://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/news/world/2013/08/12/highspeed_tube_travel_concept_unveiled_by_billionaire_entrepreneur_elon_musk/hyperloop.jpg.size.xxlarge.promo.jpg
          Maybe this will solve the North Shore to downtown congestion – via Lionsgate mount ?

    2. What is worse than SOV (single occupied vehicle) ? ZOV ! [ zero occupied vehicle) .. looking for parking or to pick up passenger !
      That’ll be many many moons away. We can’t even get Uber organized, a 5+ year technology, or speech recognition which is 30+ years old ..
      I can see AVs coming in stages, and a dedicated lane is certainly an option on highways or bridges even .. the 5 lanes per direction on Massey will come in very handy then .. and they will rename the bridge the Christy Clark bridge then in 2035 or 2040 as it was so “visionary” in its days. Maybe Oak street bridge is new by then .. or Lionsgate even ! We might even have a Broadway subway by then .. to Arbutus .. and still debating connecting it to Jericho lands and UBC !

Subscribe to Viewpoint Vancouver

Get breaking news and fresh views, direct to your inbox.

Join 7,284 other subscribers

Show your Support

Check our Patreon page for stylish coffee mugs, private city tours, and more – or, make a one-time or recurring donation. Thank you for helping shape this place we love.

Popular Articles

See All

All Articles