3 ms·

There's a simple answer to "What the hell does self-driving have to do with saving the environment?" It's just this: if we had a ride service with level 5 self

There's a simple answer to "What the hell does self-driving have to do with saving the environment?" It's just this: if we had a ride service with level 5 self-driving, it'd be way cheaper to use that than personally own a car. You'd accelerate the transition to an all-electric fleet. You might even need fewer total cars, which would help even more.

hotpotamus 4y ago
I like the idea of not having to drive a car regularly, and I say that as someone who enjoys randomly driving around the Texas Hill Country occasionally as a pastime. That said, it's not all that clear to me that eliminating a major friction associated with one of the most intense uses of energy - individual transportation end-to-end in a car, will help to save energy. If it was all derived from a clean, renewable source, that would be one thing, but that is not our current situation.
_cenw 4y ago
I'm not sure why this is better than investing in public transit, a tried and tested method that achieves much better density. Aside from Elon's apparent disgust for sharing vehicles with other people.
- ravenstine 4y ago
  Public transit requires dedicated routes, which sucks if it doesn't go where you want. Self-driving taxis can pick up multiple people going to the same place and take them there no matter where they want to go.
  - _cenw 4y ago
    I agree that to some degree that public transport can't solve all issues, but it can get you far enough that congestion becomes much less severe. It should be the primary means, not the only. Of course the US has a lot more problems with implementing public transport that aren't easy to solve and are rooted in zoning/city planning. Single family home suburbs don't have the density to justify public transit.
- DennisP 4y ago
  But expanding public transit is not something a private company can really do. If you can figure out a way to get governments to drastically expand public transit, that'd be great. Until then, it's nice seeing a company doing something that might help.
- SyzygistSix 4y ago
  Elon isn't in charge of that. Various government officials that the people elect are. How well is that working out? I'm glad that someone is forcing the move away from fossil fuels. Because even in a "progressive" bike friendly town, I see how popular that is. Not very, even among the young and childless. And self-driving doesn't have much to do with saving the environment. It's about saving lives, considering the massive number of people killed and injured by cars every year. As far as ways to get rich and things for the wealthy to spend their time and money on, that's a pretty good choice in my book.
  - _cenw 4y ago
    Elon has practically admitted that he put the Hyperloop proposal forward to delay California HSR. https://twitter.com/parismarx/status/1167410460125097990 https://twitter.com/parismarx/status/1167410460125097990
danhor 4y ago
In that case you'd probably have a lot of empty trips, dropping the average occupancy of cars below 1. I think it's unlikely we'll see a lot of 2-4 person ride sharing (dislike of strangers, longer trip times due to needing to pick-up and drop-off more people). If you don't have higher density, the time for a vehicle to get to you will also be an issue. It'd increase car-miles (likely increasing congestion) and likely lead to a move away from public transit in denser regions, akin to uber. I'm highly doubful a large sharing economy for cars will happen anyway. Conventional car sharing (not uber) isn't popular and one reason for that is that people like having a personal car as a second "living room" (leaving personal belongings) without strangers and for the instant and hassle-free access it provides. Thus I believe that self-driving will just lead to people driving more with their own personal vehicles, since it's becomes easier to do something else while driving and feels like less of a time sink.
- valenterry 4y ago
  > In that case you'd probably have a lot of empty trips, dropping the average occupancy of cars below 1 Not sure. Think about people driving others somewhere and then have to drive back, e.g. their children, drunk people or a friend to the airport etc. In addition, to reduce the price, people could share a car dynamically - that would essentially be a mix between private and public transport. I think overall those points would probably rather reduce the number of rides. If anything, it would be the convenience that increases the rides - but at least that comes with a real benefit. And for congestion - it would probably be the total opposite. Look at cities and much percentage of the road is blocked by parking vehicles. Imagine 90% are gone. Roads gonna be bigger - that alone would be a huge pro.
  - UncleEntity 4y ago
    > Not sure. Think about people driving others somewhere and then have to drive back, e.g. their children, drunk people or a friend to the airport etc. I think the point was people will own their own self driving car instead of sharing with the unwashed masses. Send it to go pickup the kids, get the groceries at the curb loading station, drive you home from the bar &etc. With good scheduling one car could run around all day picking up and dropping off the family members while running the errands in between. Of course this is a US centric view because people from other parts of the world are used to having efficient mass transit and not needing to own a car.
sgu999 4y ago
You'd also have the exact same effect with a very good public transport offering. It's more efficient than cars anyway and it exists outside of a marketing video...

hotpotamus 4y ago

I like the idea of not having to drive a car regularly, and I say that as someone who enjoys randomly driving around the Texas Hill Country occasionally as a pastime. That said, it's not all that clear to me that eliminating a major friction associated with one of the most intense uses of energy - individual transportation end-to-end in a car, will help to save energy. If it was all derived from a clean, renewable source, that would be one thing, but that is not our current situation.

_cenw 4y ago

I'm not sure why this is better than investing in public transit, a tried and tested method that achieves much better density. Aside from Elon's apparent disgust for sharing vehicles with other people.

ravenstine 4y ago
Public transit requires dedicated routes, which sucks if it doesn't go where you want. Self-driving taxis can pick up multiple people going to the same place and take them there no matter where they want to go.
- _cenw 4y ago
  I agree that to some degree that public transport can't solve all issues, but it can get you far enough that congestion becomes much less severe. It should be the primary means, not the only. Of course the US has a lot more problems with implementing public transport that aren't easy to solve and are rooted in zoning/city planning. Single family home suburbs don't have the density to justify public transit.
DennisP 4y ago
But expanding public transit is not something a private company can really do. If you can figure out a way to get governments to drastically expand public transit, that'd be great. Until then, it's nice seeing a company doing something that might help.
SyzygistSix 4y ago
Elon isn't in charge of that. Various government officials that the people elect are. How well is that working out? I'm glad that someone is forcing the move away from fossil fuels. Because even in a "progressive" bike friendly town, I see how popular that is. Not very, even among the young and childless. And self-driving doesn't have much to do with saving the environment. It's about saving lives, considering the massive number of people killed and injured by cars every year. As far as ways to get rich and things for the wealthy to spend their time and money on, that's a pretty good choice in my book.
- _cenw 4y ago
  Elon has practically admitted that he put the Hyperloop proposal forward to delay California HSR. https://twitter.com/parismarx/status/1167410460125097990 https://twitter.com/parismarx/status/1167410460125097990

danhor 4y ago

In that case you'd probably have a lot of empty trips, dropping the average occupancy of cars below 1. I think it's unlikely we'll see a lot of 2-4 person ride sharing (dislike of strangers, longer trip times due to needing to pick-up and drop-off more people). If you don't have higher density, the time for a vehicle to get to you will also be an issue. It'd increase car-miles (likely increasing congestion) and likely lead to a move away from public transit in denser regions, akin to uber. I'm highly doubful a large sharing economy for cars will happen anyway. Conventional car sharing (not uber) isn't popular and one reason for that is that people like having a personal car as a second "living room" (leaving personal belongings) without strangers and for the instant and hassle-free access it provides. Thus I believe that self-driving will just lead to people driving more with their own personal vehicles, since it's becomes easier to do something else while driving and feels like less of a time sink.

valenterry 4y ago
> In that case you'd probably have a lot of empty trips, dropping the average occupancy of cars below 1 Not sure. Think about people driving others somewhere and then have to drive back, e.g. their children, drunk people or a friend to the airport etc. In addition, to reduce the price, people could share a car dynamically - that would essentially be a mix between private and public transport. I think overall those points would probably rather reduce the number of rides. If anything, it would be the convenience that increases the rides - but at least that comes with a real benefit. And for congestion - it would probably be the total opposite. Look at cities and much percentage of the road is blocked by parking vehicles. Imagine 90% are gone. Roads gonna be bigger - that alone would be a huge pro.
- UncleEntity 4y ago
  > Not sure. Think about people driving others somewhere and then have to drive back, e.g. their children, drunk people or a friend to the airport etc. I think the point was people will own their own self driving car instead of sharing with the unwashed masses. Send it to go pickup the kids, get the groceries at the curb loading station, drive you home from the bar &etc. With good scheduling one car could run around all day picking up and dropping off the family members while running the errands in between. Of course this is a US centric view because people from other parts of the world are used to having efficient mass transit and not needing to own a car.

sgu999 4y ago

You'd also have the exact same effect with a very good public transport offering. It's more efficient than cars anyway and it exists outside of a marketing video...