3 ms·
No because you have to account for peak usage and have the capacity for it. There will be car savings, but the math wont be as simple as you say it is.
by mahyarm 10y ago
No because you have to account for peak usage and have the capacity for it. There will be car savings, but the math wont be as simple as you say it is.
- intrasight 10y agoHave staggered work start and end times and "peak usage" will be a less pronounced peak. Also add in more home offices. I've no doubt that in 20 years car ownership will be a fraction of what it is today. Everything points in that direction and nothing opposes it.
- JoshTriplett 10y ago> Have staggered work start and end times and "peak usage" will be a less pronounced peak. This would have benefits today, but still rarely happens. A very small fraction of massive businesses have shift workers do this to more efficiently handle the volume that transitions between shifts would otherwise cause, but the vast majority of businesses do not. I don't think self-driving cars would change this. > Also add in more home offices. This would help today as well, but I don't think self-driving cars will change this either. (And if they do, it might not be in the direction you'd hope: self-driving cars might cause people to tolerate longer commutes.)
- BurningFrog 10y agoSure, it's a simplified model to illustrate the mechanism radically lowering the need for parking spots. Which is quite different from "car savings", if we're being picky.