3 ms·
I could also see increased adoption if HOV lanes were set aside only for automated cars.
by bradgessler 14y ago
I could also see increased adoption if HOV lanes were set aside only for automated cars.
- dllthomas 14y agoI would object. If you want to use the HOV lane, have multiple people in your car. I understand the rationale for extending it to things that are sufficiently fuel efficient. I don't see it here.
- shasta 14y agoI assumed he meant HOV and autonomous. So that the HOV lane could go faster with higher density for example.
- esrauch 14y agoHOV lanes promote multiple people to reduce congestion, and self-driving cars are touted as a way to reduce congestion. If the latter claim is true, then HOV lanes could reduce congestion by allowing self driving cars to drive in them.
- dllthomas 14y agoAh, right - I guess I'm just so skeptical of the claims that didn't think of it. I expect self-driving cars to be driving like a cautious human driver for at least 5 years. If we get to the point where they're in fact driving closer together, then there is indeed an argument for letting them in the HOV lanes.
- brc 14y agoI actually think they will do the reverse. A self-driving car will likely do more miles. What's more, it will do empty-passenger miles. The travelling patterns of people are unlikely to change. But there remains the distinct possibility that people will get their cars to drive to work, then home (or at least to remote parking) again if 'work' does not have parking. Thus the potential for cars without people driving around. This is inherently worse for congestion than 1-person cars.