4 ms·

> Once autonomous vehicles become prevalent, traffic volume should drop That's simply not true; not only will SDCs create 'empty miles' of 0-passenger cars, bu

by 05 10y ago

> Once autonomous vehicles become prevalent, traffic volume should drop That's simply not true; not only will SDCs create 'empty miles' of 0-passenger cars, but they will make people more comfortable with longer commutes (you can sleep on the way to work now), and with average commute getting longer we'll get more passenger-miles. Sharing won't really pick up (except on the low end, displacing public transport) because SDCs are pretty cheap as is, and people generally prefer their personal space unmolested by others.

madaxe_again 10y ago
As I said, "more car use" - I.e. More passenger miles - but you can still paradoxically have less traffic volume, as journies become more efficient but more importantly as freight becomes more efficient. Re: the personal space bit... Not so sure. Many of the "younger" generation spurn car ownership so have no sunk costs, no personal space to lose. For the rest, it's going to be a question of marginal utility - and the fact that many car owners will get a train preferably where possible suggests that there is a case for non-ownership. I mean, ten years ago your man on the street would have found it inconceivable that they would own no movies, no albums, that they'd just rent them - yet here we are. Behaviour changes quickly when it starts, but slowly enough that you don't notice the change until after the event.
- 05 10y ago
  The younger generation is using cars less exactly because driving/parking/owning a car is expensive and a hassle, not because they suddenly prefer watching bums on the subway to watching Netflix alone. Choosing between Uber and shared public transportation is a question of cost, and self driving cars will get the cost down so it's much less of a factor. In all the countries where the share of public transportation is significant, the main reason is economical. Gas is more expensive in the EU, free parking is scarce, wages are lower, etc. Actually walkable cities help, but it's not like europeans couldn't find a use for a car if they could easily afford one. Or how about private car ownership growth in China [1]? The other point is that American society is pretty well-segregated, and personal cars and suburbs ensure there's minimal contact between the classes. Unless your shared car service has tiers that allow that segregation to continue, a significant amount of people won't use it. Physical security is a part of the equation - you're probably not getting sexually assaulted or burgled in a personal SDC. On renting vs owning: again, it doesn't matter - if the cars are not shared, this doesn't really affect the traffic volume (driving between drop-off and the next pick-up are empty miles, but that's hopefully insignificant). [1] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=16251 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=16251
  - Symbiote 10y ago
    > In all the countries where the share of public transportation is significant, the main reason is economical. Gas is more expensive in the EU, free parking is scarce, wages are lower, etc. Actually walkable cities help, but it's not like europeans couldn't find a use for a car if they could easily afford one. No, the main reason is government policy, most obviously in town planning. There's simply no place to park, and enough traffic that the journey is neither fast nor relaxing. The result is that people who could easily afford to (e.g. my friends working at Google or Facebook, or in finance) don't own cars, and use public transport to get to and from work. Walk round the suburbs of European cities on a weekday, and you'll see lots of parked cars, in rich and poor areas. People own them, but don't find them the best way to get to work. They use them at the weekend.
clenfest 10y ago
If you own a car, the marginal cost of an additional trip is low (basically just gas). If you don't have a car, the cost of each trip will reflect its true cost. Basic economics will tell you this will lead to less trips, trip consolidation, other modes of transportation (walking/bike) chosen as primary transportation because ride sharing is there if you really need it. The really big cost that most people consider is parking. If large wasteful parking lots are eliminated, cities can become more compact which in turn will cause even more people to give up cars and so on. As to your point about sharing, at some point if you want to be in the car by yourself it will cost extra. Again, economics...

by 05 10y ago

madaxe_again 10y ago

As I said, "more car use" - I.e. More passenger miles - but you can still paradoxically have less traffic volume, as journies become more efficient but more importantly as freight becomes more efficient. Re: the personal space bit... Not so sure. Many of the "younger" generation spurn car ownership so have no sunk costs, no personal space to lose. For the rest, it's going to be a question of marginal utility - and the fact that many car owners will get a train preferably where possible suggests that there is a case for non-ownership. I mean, ten years ago your man on the street would have found it inconceivable that they would own no movies, no albums, that they'd just rent them - yet here we are. Behaviour changes quickly when it starts, but slowly enough that you don't notice the change until after the event.

05 10y ago
The younger generation is using cars less exactly because driving/parking/owning a car is expensive and a hassle, not because they suddenly prefer watching bums on the subway to watching Netflix alone. Choosing between Uber and shared public transportation is a question of cost, and self driving cars will get the cost down so it's much less of a factor. In all the countries where the share of public transportation is significant, the main reason is economical. Gas is more expensive in the EU, free parking is scarce, wages are lower, etc. Actually walkable cities help, but it's not like europeans couldn't find a use for a car if they could easily afford one. Or how about private car ownership growth in China [1]? The other point is that American society is pretty well-segregated, and personal cars and suburbs ensure there's minimal contact between the classes. Unless your shared car service has tiers that allow that segregation to continue, a significant amount of people won't use it. Physical security is a part of the equation - you're probably not getting sexually assaulted or burgled in a personal SDC. On renting vs owning: again, it doesn't matter - if the cars are not shared, this doesn't really affect the traffic volume (driving between drop-off and the next pick-up are empty miles, but that's hopefully insignificant). [1] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=16251 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=16251
- Symbiote 10y ago
  > In all the countries where the share of public transportation is significant, the main reason is economical. Gas is more expensive in the EU, free parking is scarce, wages are lower, etc. Actually walkable cities help, but it's not like europeans couldn't find a use for a car if they could easily afford one. No, the main reason is government policy, most obviously in town planning. There's simply no place to park, and enough traffic that the journey is neither fast nor relaxing. The result is that people who could easily afford to (e.g. my friends working at Google or Facebook, or in finance) don't own cars, and use public transport to get to and from work. Walk round the suburbs of European cities on a weekday, and you'll see lots of parked cars, in rich and poor areas. People own them, but don't find them the best way to get to work. They use them at the weekend.

clenfest 10y ago

If you own a car, the marginal cost of an additional trip is low (basically just gas). If you don't have a car, the cost of each trip will reflect its true cost. Basic economics will tell you this will lead to less trips, trip consolidation, other modes of transportation (walking/bike) chosen as primary transportation because ride sharing is there if you really need it. The really big cost that most people consider is parking. If large wasteful parking lots are eliminated, cities can become more compact which in turn will cause even more people to give up cars and so on. As to your point about sharing, at some point if you want to be in the car by yourself it will cost extra. Again, economics...