> Safety and environmental impact are commonly accepted as the two largest issues with cars. We are poised to address both of these over the next two decades. Y

> Safety and environmental impact are commonly accepted as the two largest issues with cars. We are poised to address both of these over the next two decades. Yet cars are still somehow intrinsically bad nonetheless? Urban designs that encourage (practically require) walking a few more kilometres/miles a day would add years to healthy lifespan at a population level. So if you prefix "Health and" to Safety, then yes, cars are intrinsically worse than most alternatives. Also, the environmental impact of cars does not just come from their emissions. Spreading cities out requires longer (and thicker) wires, longer pipes, and more maintenance of roads and berms, and it causes more soil loss. Self driving and electric motors (I am guessing these are what you refer to with "we are poised to address") can't solve these problems. In transport the choices are not between "good" and "bad", they are between bad with one set of disadvantages, and bad with another set of disadvantages. To me, urban designs that require less transport overall are to be preferred.