9 ms·

The title is misleading. The main argument of Professor Frank Kelly from KCL is not against EV but against all cars. So burn calories by walking and cycling or

by devy 9y ago

The title is misleading. The main argument of Professor Frank Kelly from KCL is not against EV but against all cars. So burn calories by walking and cycling or use public transits, which is appropriate for highly populated megacities with severe congestion problems, let alone public health concerns.

stcredzero 9y ago
The title is misleading. The main argument of Professor Frank Kelly from KCL is not against EV but against all cars. Automated EV cars are a necessary step! Once automated EV cars become the norm, there will be even more value placed on Public Spaces of Value. Right now, the dirt and fumes from current automotive technology -- along with the requirement for vast paved areas for parking -- make it harder to achieve the traditional urban Public Spaces of Value so common in the US in the 18th and 19th centuries. (That said, not having horse excrement everywhere was an environmental boon of cars.) Once automated EV cars become the norm, society will think about urban transport differently, and we will change the urban environment in just as drastic a fashion as we did to make way for internet combustion engine cars. Right now, public spaces most often have to be of a large granularity. We can return to a time when urban Public Spaces of Value were ad-hoc and adjacent to residences and businesses. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7fRIGphgtk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7fRIGphgtk
- alex_duf 9y ago
  I don't think autonomous cars are going to be more efficient than public transport since you'll still need plenty of them at peak time. And plenty of autonomous cars means traffic jams. They can't replace public transport on that aspect as the transport density is way higher in a train or a bus than on individual autonomous vehicles. Sure they are going to revolutionise car ownership but I don't think they will change the daily commute for the average office worker.
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    My point is, that the model of car ownership will change, along with a public awareness of the benefits of a different model. When everyone owned their cars, they had sunk costs that would align them against putting more public resources toward other forms of transit. When cars transformed urban landscapes into paved-over internal-combustion pollution zones, the traditional charms of Public Spaces of Value were obscured or in some cases wiped out. But when autonomous EV cars start to undo some of that mess, people will start to think, "You know, we still have these traffic jams, maybe there's a better way of doing things?" EDIT: >sigh< My whole point is that automated EVs will free public thinking, enabling yet further changes to the public's thinking about how urban transport works. Please provide a quote where I say that automated cars are more efficient than other forms of public transport. (I only say that they will be more efficient than current cars.) Also, please provide a quote that shows I consider automated EVs to be an endpoint in the evolution of transportation. I'm far too often unpleasantly surprised at the level of reading comprehension here on HN.
    - devy 9y ago
      You are still missing the point. Streets in megacities just don't have enough space for cars, automated or not. It's about efficient transportation not automation. This is the same reason Elon Musk is so frustrated in LA traffic (just like London, NYC, Paris etc.) that he is doing The Boring Company to dug underground tunnels solve the transportation.
      - stcredzero 9y ago
        My whole point is that automated EVs will free public thinking, enabling yet further changes to the public's thinking about how urban transport works. Please provide a quote where I say that automated cars are more efficient than other forms of public transport. (I only say that they will be more efficient than current cars, and you'll have to go to an entirely different day to find that one.) Also, please provide a quote that shows I consider automated EVs to be the endpoint in the evolution of transportation.
      - bryondowd 9y ago
        Well, you could argue that automation could improve driving efficiency. Will full automation, you could potentially have more cars use the same amount of road space, since they have more immediate reaction times. Maybe not enough, but it's something. You may also eliminate a fair number of trips by one-car families who have to drive a spouse to work, then go home, then go back out again to pick them up and home again. Little things like that might add up. But yeah, overall, public transport would be preferable. Of course, automating buses would probably make for cheaper operating costs, and potentially make them more available. Also, the point about parking seemed to be overlooked. Being able to eliminate almost all the parking spaces in a built-up area would be a pretty huge boon. Vehicles could simply drive out to less cramped areas during low volume times when they aren't needed, or to recharge.
  - mohaine 9y ago
    I have to disagree. Most traffic jams are more a factor of human nature then anything else. Ever been in a slowdown due to drivers checking out a fender bender going in the other direction on a divided highway? Combine the lack of unneeded slow downs with closer following distances with fewer crashes and road capacity will go way up.
    - strange_quark 9y ago
      > Most traffic jams are more a factor of human nature then anything else. Ever been in a slowdown due to drivers checking out a fender bender going in the other direction on a divided highway? Combine the lack of unneeded slow downs with closer following distances with fewer crashes and road capacity will go way up. Even with autonomous cars, roadways still have a peak capacity. Yes, the peak capacity will probably go up if every driver is driving "perfectly", but there will still be plenty of bottlenecks, whether those are slower moving trucks, crosswalks, traffic signals, etc. I'd guess that we might even see more traffic than we currently have because if you don't have to drive yourself, people are incentivized to take their car; even if it's slower than mass transit, sitting in your own car is more pleasant for most people than a train or bus.
    - sokoloff 9y ago
      Morning and evening rush hours are still going to be a thing. If autonomous vehicles reduce the per-vehicle impact of rush hours, I expect that we'll just start seeing more cars participating in rush hours via induced demand. (People will not avoid them as much; people will switch from public transport to private autonomous transport; people will be more willing to live farther from work for cheaper housing/more land/whatever.)
  - skybrian 9y ago
    It seems like there are plenty of ways self-driving cars and public transport could work together, by picking up and dropping people off without the need for parking, making car sharing easier, and by letting some less-used routes shut down off-peak.

by devy 9y ago

stcredzero 9y ago

The title is misleading. The main argument of Professor Frank Kelly from KCL is not against EV but against all cars. Automated EV cars are a necessary step! Once automated EV cars become the norm, there will be even more value placed on Public Spaces of Value. Right now, the dirt and fumes from current automotive technology -- along with the requirement for vast paved areas for parking -- make it harder to achieve the traditional urban Public Spaces of Value so common in the US in the 18th and 19th centuries. (That said, not having horse excrement everywhere was an environmental boon of cars.) Once automated EV cars become the norm, society will think about urban transport differently, and we will change the urban environment in just as drastic a fashion as we did to make way for internet combustion engine cars. Right now, public spaces most often have to be of a large granularity. We can return to a time when urban Public Spaces of Value were ad-hoc and adjacent to residences and businesses. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7fRIGphgtk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7fRIGphgtk

alex_duf 9y ago
I don't think autonomous cars are going to be more efficient than public transport since you'll still need plenty of them at peak time. And plenty of autonomous cars means traffic jams. They can't replace public transport on that aspect as the transport density is way higher in a train or a bus than on individual autonomous vehicles. Sure they are going to revolutionise car ownership but I don't think they will change the daily commute for the average office worker.
- stcredzero 9y ago
  My point is, that the model of car ownership will change, along with a public awareness of the benefits of a different model. When everyone owned their cars, they had sunk costs that would align them against putting more public resources toward other forms of transit. When cars transformed urban landscapes into paved-over internal-combustion pollution zones, the traditional charms of Public Spaces of Value were obscured or in some cases wiped out. But when autonomous EV cars start to undo some of that mess, people will start to think, "You know, we still have these traffic jams, maybe there's a better way of doing things?" EDIT: >sigh< My whole point is that automated EVs will free public thinking, enabling yet further changes to the public's thinking about how urban transport works. Please provide a quote where I say that automated cars are more efficient than other forms of public transport. (I only say that they will be more efficient than current cars.) Also, please provide a quote that shows I consider automated EVs to be an endpoint in the evolution of transportation. I'm far too often unpleasantly surprised at the level of reading comprehension here on HN.
  - devy 9y ago
    You are still missing the point. Streets in megacities just don't have enough space for cars, automated or not. It's about efficient transportation not automation. This is the same reason Elon Musk is so frustrated in LA traffic (just like London, NYC, Paris etc.) that he is doing The Boring Company to dug underground tunnels solve the transportation.
    - stcredzero 9y ago
      My whole point is that automated EVs will free public thinking, enabling yet further changes to the public's thinking about how urban transport works. Please provide a quote where I say that automated cars are more efficient than other forms of public transport. (I only say that they will be more efficient than current cars, and you'll have to go to an entirely different day to find that one.) Also, please provide a quote that shows I consider automated EVs to be the endpoint in the evolution of transportation.
    - bryondowd 9y ago
      Well, you could argue that automation could improve driving efficiency. Will full automation, you could potentially have more cars use the same amount of road space, since they have more immediate reaction times. Maybe not enough, but it's something. You may also eliminate a fair number of trips by one-car families who have to drive a spouse to work, then go home, then go back out again to pick them up and home again. Little things like that might add up. But yeah, overall, public transport would be preferable. Of course, automating buses would probably make for cheaper operating costs, and potentially make them more available. Also, the point about parking seemed to be overlooked. Being able to eliminate almost all the parking spaces in a built-up area would be a pretty huge boon. Vehicles could simply drive out to less cramped areas during low volume times when they aren't needed, or to recharge.
- mohaine 9y ago
  I have to disagree. Most traffic jams are more a factor of human nature then anything else. Ever been in a slowdown due to drivers checking out a fender bender going in the other direction on a divided highway? Combine the lack of unneeded slow downs with closer following distances with fewer crashes and road capacity will go way up.
  - strange_quark 9y ago
    > Most traffic jams are more a factor of human nature then anything else. Ever been in a slowdown due to drivers checking out a fender bender going in the other direction on a divided highway? Combine the lack of unneeded slow downs with closer following distances with fewer crashes and road capacity will go way up. Even with autonomous cars, roadways still have a peak capacity. Yes, the peak capacity will probably go up if every driver is driving "perfectly", but there will still be plenty of bottlenecks, whether those are slower moving trucks, crosswalks, traffic signals, etc. I'd guess that we might even see more traffic than we currently have because if you don't have to drive yourself, people are incentivized to take their car; even if it's slower than mass transit, sitting in your own car is more pleasant for most people than a train or bus.
  - sokoloff 9y ago
    Morning and evening rush hours are still going to be a thing. If autonomous vehicles reduce the per-vehicle impact of rush hours, I expect that we'll just start seeing more cars participating in rush hours via induced demand. (People will not avoid them as much; people will switch from public transport to private autonomous transport; people will be more willing to live farther from work for cheaper housing/more land/whatever.)
- skybrian 9y ago
  It seems like there are plenty of ways self-driving cars and public transport could work together, by picking up and dropping people off without the need for parking, making car sharing easier, and by letting some less-used routes shut down off-peak.