11 ms·

> "we are now serving over 10 thousand trips per week to public riders, not including employees. With this latest expansion, we intend for those numbers to acce

> "we are now serving over 10 thousand trips per week to public riders, not including employees. With this latest expansion, we intend for those numbers to accelerate rapidly to 10 times that scale by next summer" they've been pretty cautious on predictions after the AV hype boom and bust a couple years ago. 10x in a year is an ambitious goal.

melling 3y ago
10,000 trips in electric vehicles. Self-driving EV’s in all major cities would be a big win for the climate and the air quality.
- tommoor 3y ago
  And pedestrian/cyclist safety
  - twoWhlsGud 3y ago
    Not to mention everyone else who is not driving a 9000 lb Hummer - e.g. see how fear of being squished by a giant SUV dominates the discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35827974 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35827974
  - mertd 3y ago
    To be fair, human drivers don't do terribly well on that front.
    - peter422 3y ago
      The comment is saying these cars will improve pedestrian/cyclist safety. I can also attest to it. I've interacted as a pedestrian and cyclist to many cruise and waymo cars and they've been very, very cautious and careful.
    - panick21_ 3y ago
      Drivers do fine if the infrastructure is designed for humans rather then for cars. The reason so many people die in US cities is because of policy, not because people can't drive inherently.
      - twoWhlsGud 3y ago
        Driver quality in the US is much lower than in cycling hotspots like the Netherlands or Denmark. Infrastructure helps, but better drivers are critical.
        panick21_ 3y ago
        I think it feels that way because people just drive much faster. If you forced people to slow down, I don't think the avg quality of driver is worse.
      - xnx 3y ago
        I don't have much international experience, but the level of distraction of US drivers is shocking. Easily 50% of drivers I see are looking at their phones (even while going through an intersection!).
- majormajor 3y ago
  It's probably more of a mixed bag. Self-driving car fleets probably increase suburbization in the same way that trains created suburbs long ago. Depending on how it breaks out, "more space per person at similar total environmental impact" is a quality of life win but not a climate-change-fighting one. Pedestrian safety and other externalities are probably a big win, still.
  - jccooper 3y ago
    I feel like the increase in suburbanization due to self-driving cars is probably pretty small over person-driven cars. Given the low building density that human-driven cars create (read: parking lots) there's some hope that a large change in car parking behavior would lead to lots of infill development.
    - majormajor 3y ago
      If your commute is "sitting in an office doing email or taking calls" instead of "having to babysit your car through traffic" you're gonna see some significant behavioral changes. The parking lot point is interesting, I hadn't thought about that. But it's not obviously better to me: commuting behavior is very time-of-day determined, and the cars are gonna have to be somewhere in between rush hours. You don't want them on the road, and you can probably shift around to catch other sorts of predictable demand, but environmentally you're gonna want to minimize the total nubmer of miles driven without passengers. EDIT: so in areas with less development and commmuters are parking their cars in surface lots all day, yeah, you don't need those surface lots for commuters + all the other lots at retail, residential, etc all at once if the cars are moving around to other uses during the day. But in denser recent-development areas where office parks predominantly have underground or garage parking it may be harder to realize infill there.
      - xnx 3y ago
        There are a lot of possible changes possible with autonomous vehicles (long term, I think it will be rare for an asset that costs tens of thousands of dollars to sit idly for 80+% of its life), but, for a simple example, imagine how many cars could fit in a perfectly packed parking lot: cars packed bumper to bumper and no need to leave space for doors to open.
- iinnPP 3y ago
  I agree but also worry about the job loss and the inevitable loss of freedoms that will inevitably be 'justifiable' when automatic driving is the norm. Basically, if the cost can be comparable to car ownership, reducing resource use by making car buying of any kind far more difficult. Which is admittedly entirely a thought experiment. Though it is a thought experiment many authors seem to arrive at. Edit: I wish I could say I was surprised at the downvotes for a comment that is pro-worker.
  - aidos 3y ago
    Which jobs are you thinking? Bus drivers? Taxis? Car production? Which loss of freedom are you referring to? I can’t help thinking that the potential upside will far out-way the cost. London streets are littered with dormant vehicles. Most just sit there taking up room and dominating the city. It would be a whole other city if we could change that dynamic.
    - genghisjahn 3y ago
      Truck drivers mainly. There are LOTS of truck drivers. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/02/05/382664837/map-the-most-common-job-in-every-state https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/02/05/382664837/map-...
      - patriciaaa 3y ago
        [dead]
      - tyingq 3y ago
        If they get over-the-road trucking automated, that also trickles down to many roadside workers...gas stations, restaurants, motels, and so on. Then, some back office functions associated with routing, driver compliance, hiring drivers, etc. I'm sure there's more. It would be a big adjustment.
        iinnPP 3y ago
        Not just financial either. When more people are perpetually online in an internet populated by an even larger population of bots designed for engagement, what happens? Many of the jobs you are referring to are socially fulfilling to some people. It's an escape from a poor home situation or from an addiction.
- fshbbdssbbgdd 3y ago
  The “EV” part seems to be carrying the weight there, not the self-driving. Self-driving might even make those problems worse by decreasing the cost of driving. It’s like saying “self-driving cars and solving the nitrogen fixation problem would be a big win for preventing famine.”
- xnx 3y ago
  And noise! I will rejoice when idiots are no longer allowed to speed and operate clearly illegal (in terms of emissions and noise) vehicles on public roads.
  - rootusrootus 3y ago
    Don't worry, the gov't is here to make sure you don't miss out. Newer EVs and hybrids are required to make noise at <20mph. Never mind that a properly muffled ICEV is only audible when completely stopped. My neighborhood is getting louder as we all switch to EVs.
    - r00fus 3y ago
      I was worried about that back in 2018 when it was announced but having heard hundreds of backup sounds (luckily mine is silent as it's from before 2019), they are all chill and mostly imperceptible.
  - abawany 3y ago
    that and rolling coal - I see at least one per month in texas.
- tedivm 3y ago
  Climate yes, but air quality not by as much as you'd think. Multiple studies have come out showing that the weight of EVs puts more pressure on tires and breaks, which in turn increases the particles they dump in the air. > As a result, total PM10 emissions from EVs were found to be equal to those of modern ICEVs. PM2.5 emissions were only 1–3% lower for EVs compared to modern ICEVs. Therefore, it could be concluded that the increased popularity of electric vehicles will likely not have a great effect on PM levels. Non-exhaust emissions already account for over 90% of PM10 and 85% of PM2.5 emissions from traffic. These proportions will continue to increase as exhaust standards improve and average vehicle weight increases. Future policy should consequently focus on setting standards for non-exhaust emissions and encouraging weight reduction of all vehicles to significantly reduce PM emissions from traffic. As the quote mentioned, this can be improved. Lighter batteries, better regenerative breaking, and improvements in tire material would all help. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S135223101630187X https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13522...
  - dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
    I wonder if it would make sense to program robotaxis to use only regenerative braking, maybe with a more powerful regenerative braking system, and using real brakes only for emergencies.
    - magnuspaaske 3y ago
      That's how most electric cars are set up already
  - shiftpgdn 3y ago
    I feel like this is a nonsense study. They used a 2013 study that measured gas cars and then just extrapolated that out based on weight for EVs and did nothing to account for regenerative breaking, specialty EV tires, etc. Also the numbers are from the Simons 2013 study seem to be dubious as well. Anyone who has been to Oslo understands EVs are a huge benefit for urban air quality.
    - 3y ago
- SoftTalker 3y ago
  What is the power source for charging these EVs? In Phoenix, I could imagine it might be solar but the cars probably want to charge at night during low-demand times? If it's utility electric, from what fuel source is it generated?
  - theobromus 3y ago
    Waymo buys renewable energy for charging https://blog.waymo.com/2023/03/paving-way-toward-fully-electric-ride.html https://blog.waymo.com/2023/03/paving-way-toward-fully-elect...
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    Arizona is a nuclear and natural-gas state [1], with most of the coal (No. 3) being retired in the coming years [2]. [1] https://www.eia.gov/state/print.php https://www.eia.gov/state/print.php [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Arizona#Coal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Ar...
- inferiorhuman 3y ago
  Self-driving EV’s in all major cities would be a big win for the climate and the air quality. Counterpoint: no, they wouldn't. Moving towards self-driving automobiles merely props up an inefficient mode of transportation. Imagine sinking all that money that's being blown on self-driving cars into pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. The problem with cars is cars, not drivers.
  - xnx 3y ago
    There's probably nothing better for bikes and pedestrians than self-driving cars. With autonomous drivers, every road becomes safe for bikes and pedestrians.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Imagine sinking all that money that's being blown on self-driving cars into pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure This does jack squat for getting across San Francisco or from corner to corner of Phoenix.
    - inferiorhuman 3y ago
      You can already bike from one part of SF to another, investment in bicycle infrastructure would make that easier and safer. Or, you know, public transit. Individual vehicles suffer from massive inefficiency compared to nearly any other form of transportation – look at Elon's fully autonomous tunnel.
      - xnx 3y ago
        > Individual vehicles suffer from massive inefficiency compared to nearly any other form of transportation I though this too until I looked at the true dollar costs or carbon impact per passenger mile. That doesn't even account for the externalities of particulate pollution and road wear. The buses in my city are also filthy diesel, belching thick, noxious, clouds of soot as they accelerate away from the stop, right at crowds of people who just got off the bus. Heavy buses also require special concrete pads at every stop and still do heavy damage to the road surface: rutting and exacerbating potholes.

melling 3y ago

10,000 trips in electric vehicles. Self-driving EV’s in all major cities would be a big win for the climate and the air quality.

tommoor 3y ago
And pedestrian/cyclist safety
- twoWhlsGud 3y ago
  Not to mention everyone else who is not driving a 9000 lb Hummer - e.g. see how fear of being squished by a giant SUV dominates the discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35827974 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35827974
- mertd 3y ago
  To be fair, human drivers don't do terribly well on that front.
  - peter422 3y ago
    The comment is saying these cars will improve pedestrian/cyclist safety. I can also attest to it. I've interacted as a pedestrian and cyclist to many cruise and waymo cars and they've been very, very cautious and careful.
  - panick21_ 3y ago
    Drivers do fine if the infrastructure is designed for humans rather then for cars. The reason so many people die in US cities is because of policy, not because people can't drive inherently.
    - twoWhlsGud 3y ago
      Driver quality in the US is much lower than in cycling hotspots like the Netherlands or Denmark. Infrastructure helps, but better drivers are critical.
      - panick21_ 3y ago
        I think it feels that way because people just drive much faster. If you forced people to slow down, I don't think the avg quality of driver is worse.
    - xnx 3y ago
      I don't have much international experience, but the level of distraction of US drivers is shocking. Easily 50% of drivers I see are looking at their phones (even while going through an intersection!).
majormajor 3y ago
It's probably more of a mixed bag. Self-driving car fleets probably increase suburbization in the same way that trains created suburbs long ago. Depending on how it breaks out, "more space per person at similar total environmental impact" is a quality of life win but not a climate-change-fighting one. Pedestrian safety and other externalities are probably a big win, still.
- jccooper 3y ago
  I feel like the increase in suburbanization due to self-driving cars is probably pretty small over person-driven cars. Given the low building density that human-driven cars create (read: parking lots) there's some hope that a large change in car parking behavior would lead to lots of infill development.
  - majormajor 3y ago
    If your commute is "sitting in an office doing email or taking calls" instead of "having to babysit your car through traffic" you're gonna see some significant behavioral changes. The parking lot point is interesting, I hadn't thought about that. But it's not obviously better to me: commuting behavior is very time-of-day determined, and the cars are gonna have to be somewhere in between rush hours. You don't want them on the road, and you can probably shift around to catch other sorts of predictable demand, but environmentally you're gonna want to minimize the total nubmer of miles driven without passengers. EDIT: so in areas with less development and commmuters are parking their cars in surface lots all day, yeah, you don't need those surface lots for commuters + all the other lots at retail, residential, etc all at once if the cars are moving around to other uses during the day. But in denser recent-development areas where office parks predominantly have underground or garage parking it may be harder to realize infill there.
    - xnx 3y ago
      There are a lot of possible changes possible with autonomous vehicles (long term, I think it will be rare for an asset that costs tens of thousands of dollars to sit idly for 80+% of its life), but, for a simple example, imagine how many cars could fit in a perfectly packed parking lot: cars packed bumper to bumper and no need to leave space for doors to open.
iinnPP 3y ago
I agree but also worry about the job loss and the inevitable loss of freedoms that will inevitably be 'justifiable' when automatic driving is the norm. Basically, if the cost can be comparable to car ownership, reducing resource use by making car buying of any kind far more difficult. Which is admittedly entirely a thought experiment. Though it is a thought experiment many authors seem to arrive at. Edit: I wish I could say I was surprised at the downvotes for a comment that is pro-worker.
- aidos 3y ago
  Which jobs are you thinking? Bus drivers? Taxis? Car production? Which loss of freedom are you referring to? I can’t help thinking that the potential upside will far out-way the cost. London streets are littered with dormant vehicles. Most just sit there taking up room and dominating the city. It would be a whole other city if we could change that dynamic.
  - genghisjahn 3y ago
    Truck drivers mainly. There are LOTS of truck drivers. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/02/05/382664837/map-the-most-common-job-in-every-state https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/02/05/382664837/map-...
    - patriciaaa 3y ago
      [dead]
    - tyingq 3y ago
      If they get over-the-road trucking automated, that also trickles down to many roadside workers...gas stations, restaurants, motels, and so on. Then, some back office functions associated with routing, driver compliance, hiring drivers, etc. I'm sure there's more. It would be a big adjustment.
      - iinnPP 3y ago
        Not just financial either. When more people are perpetually online in an internet populated by an even larger population of bots designed for engagement, what happens? Many of the jobs you are referring to are socially fulfilling to some people. It's an escape from a poor home situation or from an addiction.
fshbbdssbbgdd 3y ago
The “EV” part seems to be carrying the weight there, not the self-driving. Self-driving might even make those problems worse by decreasing the cost of driving. It’s like saying “self-driving cars and solving the nitrogen fixation problem would be a big win for preventing famine.”
xnx 3y ago
And noise! I will rejoice when idiots are no longer allowed to speed and operate clearly illegal (in terms of emissions and noise) vehicles on public roads.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  Don't worry, the gov't is here to make sure you don't miss out. Newer EVs and hybrids are required to make noise at <20mph. Never mind that a properly muffled ICEV is only audible when completely stopped. My neighborhood is getting louder as we all switch to EVs.
  - r00fus 3y ago
    I was worried about that back in 2018 when it was announced but having heard hundreds of backup sounds (luckily mine is silent as it's from before 2019), they are all chill and mostly imperceptible.
- abawany 3y ago
  that and rolling coal - I see at least one per month in texas.
tedivm 3y ago
Climate yes, but air quality not by as much as you'd think. Multiple studies have come out showing that the weight of EVs puts more pressure on tires and breaks, which in turn increases the particles they dump in the air. > As a result, total PM10 emissions from EVs were found to be equal to those of modern ICEVs. PM2.5 emissions were only 1–3% lower for EVs compared to modern ICEVs. Therefore, it could be concluded that the increased popularity of electric vehicles will likely not have a great effect on PM levels. Non-exhaust emissions already account for over 90% of PM10 and 85% of PM2.5 emissions from traffic. These proportions will continue to increase as exhaust standards improve and average vehicle weight increases. Future policy should consequently focus on setting standards for non-exhaust emissions and encouraging weight reduction of all vehicles to significantly reduce PM emissions from traffic. As the quote mentioned, this can be improved. Lighter batteries, better regenerative breaking, and improvements in tire material would all help. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S135223101630187X https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13522...
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
  I wonder if it would make sense to program robotaxis to use only regenerative braking, maybe with a more powerful regenerative braking system, and using real brakes only for emergencies.
  - magnuspaaske 3y ago
    That's how most electric cars are set up already
- shiftpgdn 3y ago
  I feel like this is a nonsense study. They used a 2013 study that measured gas cars and then just extrapolated that out based on weight for EVs and did nothing to account for regenerative breaking, specialty EV tires, etc. Also the numbers are from the Simons 2013 study seem to be dubious as well. Anyone who has been to Oslo understands EVs are a huge benefit for urban air quality.
  - 3y ago
SoftTalker 3y ago
What is the power source for charging these EVs? In Phoenix, I could imagine it might be solar but the cars probably want to charge at night during low-demand times? If it's utility electric, from what fuel source is it generated?
- theobromus 3y ago
  Waymo buys renewable energy for charging https://blog.waymo.com/2023/03/paving-way-toward-fully-electric-ride.html https://blog.waymo.com/2023/03/paving-way-toward-fully-elect...
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  Arizona is a nuclear and natural-gas state [1], with most of the coal (No. 3) being retired in the coming years [2]. [1] https://www.eia.gov/state/print.php https://www.eia.gov/state/print.php [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Arizona#Coal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Ar...
inferiorhuman 3y ago
Self-driving EV’s in all major cities would be a big win for the climate and the air quality. Counterpoint: no, they wouldn't. Moving towards self-driving automobiles merely props up an inefficient mode of transportation. Imagine sinking all that money that's being blown on self-driving cars into pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. The problem with cars is cars, not drivers.
- xnx 3y ago
  There's probably nothing better for bikes and pedestrians than self-driving cars. With autonomous drivers, every road becomes safe for bikes and pedestrians.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Imagine sinking all that money that's being blown on self-driving cars into pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure This does jack squat for getting across San Francisco or from corner to corner of Phoenix.
  - inferiorhuman 3y ago
    You can already bike from one part of SF to another, investment in bicycle infrastructure would make that easier and safer. Or, you know, public transit. Individual vehicles suffer from massive inefficiency compared to nearly any other form of transportation – look at Elon's fully autonomous tunnel.
    - xnx 3y ago
      > Individual vehicles suffer from massive inefficiency compared to nearly any other form of transportation I though this too until I looked at the true dollar costs or carbon impact per passenger mile. That doesn't even account for the externalities of particulate pollution and road wear. The buses in my city are also filthy diesel, belching thick, noxious, clouds of soot as they accelerate away from the stop, right at crowds of people who just got off the bus. Heavy buses also require special concrete pads at every stop and still do heavy damage to the road surface: rutting and exacerbating potholes.