tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37936507.post8360136471390731888..comments2023-08-08T10:25:47.529+01:00Comments on McCabism: Driverless cars and citiesGordon McCabehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09151162643523937086noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37936507.post-62535683033608829632017-09-09T10:48:35.069+01:002017-09-09T10:48:35.069+01:00"It's most likely that the biggest benefi..."It's most likely that the biggest benefits will occur in cities, so your arguments about less-populated areas don't really apply."<br /><br />My arguments were not about less populated areas, they were about the fact that many people drive in and out of cities to and from their place of work, so the arguments do apply.<br /><br />"The components may degrade faster, but not faster-per-passenger-mile. Maintenance costs will not be greater."<br /><br />That conflates driverless cars with ride-sharing. With driverless cars there would be less cars, but more journeys, hence components would degrade faster, and without ride-sharing they would degrade faster per passenger-mile. <br /><br />Driverless cars do not entail ride-sharing. Conversely, ride-sharing of taxis is already feasible without driverless cars. The Scientific American article draws attention to a study which concludes that taxi sharing in New York would reduce the number of cars by 40%. The fact this hasn't happened suggests that people generally don't want to ride-share. That would still apply with driverless cars.Gordon McCabehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09151162643523937086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37936507.post-69754855406950047622017-09-04T18:14:02.014+01:002017-09-04T18:14:02.014+01:00The benefits of self-driving vehicles will vary de...The benefits of self-driving vehicles will vary depending on the type of location. It's most likely that the biggest benefits will occur in cities, so your arguments about less-populated areas don't really apply.<br /><br />> People like the convenience and efficacy of having a car parked adjacent to their home or place of work.<br /><br />Not in a city. Many people in large cities forgo their own car because it's a lot of trouble to find parking at your destination, and when you do find parking, it costs you $$$, and you also would probably pay $200 or so for the privilege of parking at your apartment.<br /><br />Also, when buying a car you necessarily have to compromise between the small car you'd use every day, versus the SUV you use once in a while for that skiing trip or hardware store. It would be more appropriate to choose a vehicle that is better sized for that particular journey.<br /><br />> 5) If cars are constantly in use, their components will degrade in a shorter period of time, so maintenance costs will greater, and the environmental impact of manufacturing new tyres, batteries etc. will be greater.<br /><br />That doesn't follow. The components may degrade faster, but not faster-per-passenger-mile. Maintenance costs will not be greater.<br /><br />1) Ride-sharing would reduce the number of cars, not the number of journeys. <br />All other things being equal, that would increase congestion and pollution, not reduce it. <br /><br />Self-driving cars could improve things beyond just pure journey counts. For example, often in cities we lose two lanes of traffic due to on-street parking, but usually some idiot is double-parked with their flashers on because they are waiting for someone. Self-driving cars could make more efficient use of the roads we already have, for example by avoiding stopping in an intersection (avoiding gridlock), reversing travel direction of one-way streets, better signal management. These things are not necessarily functions of the self-driving vehicle. Blocking intersections is illegal, but rarely are people cited for it. So, that is a case where enforcement is too costly for the benefit. Coding the desired behavior into self-driving vehicle software would improve compliance.<br /><br /><br />With respect to Automated Intersections, Peter Stone's group at UT Austin has done a significant amount of research on this topic and I encourage you to read his papers:<br /><br />http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~aim/<br /><br />Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00775150590460013918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37936507.post-24721509365948557152017-08-08T19:04:48.648+01:002017-08-08T19:04:48.648+01:00Eliminating queues at traffic lights, and the dead...Eliminating queues at traffic lights, and the dead time which occurs when the flow from one direction has been stopped by a red light, but the flow in another direction hasn't received a green light, would eliminate one type of inefficiency. <br /><br />However, the result is that you deliver the cars more quickly to the other limiting points in the system capacity, so the queues and the delays are longer at those points. It wouldn't necessarily decrease journey time.Gordon McCabehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09151162643523937086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37936507.post-72693660034057154102017-08-08T18:44:39.187+01:002017-08-08T18:44:39.187+01:00One quibble: Indeed, doubling the capacity of inte...One quibble: Indeed, doubling the capacity of intersections may not increase the capacity of the system. However, it would decrease journey times and prevent inefficient fluctuations in speed. I think this is the point they are making. Ariel & Cypora Cohenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02697910798209627214noreply@blogger.com