Google's driverless car
by James A. Bacon
The automobile industry may not be anybody’s idea of a dynamic business sector, but it is highly competitive and more innovative than people give it credit for. The latest example is the research being conducted on driverless cars, which Bloomberg Business Week predicts could become the new “road rage,” a sci-fi dream that “could be real within a decade.”
Needless to say, no-hands cars would scramble everything we think we know about transportation preferences today. On the positive side, automobiles equipped with laser sensors would allow them to travel much closer together, increasing the capacity of existing roadway and reducing the number of accidents. Driverless cars also would provide more independence for the elderly and the disabled. Furthermore, people could do something productive with their drive-time, like reading, answering email or surfing the Web (OK, maybe that’s not so productive), instead of listening to talk radio. On the other hand, driverless cars potentially would put more people (and cars) on the road, aggravating traffic congestion. It’s hard to say how it would all play out.
There is, however, one factor missing from the breathless Bloomberg Business Week article, in which the only sign of skepticism is whether the technology really will be ready for widespread commercialization within 10 years. Here’s the big question: Will driverless cares be affordable? There was no indication in the article how much driverless systems would cost. Equipping cars with all those lasers, sensors, GPS navigation systems, artificial intelligence and who knows what else will be expensive.
The cost of automobile ownership is already slipping beyond the financial reach of more and more American families as it is. (See “The Era of Foreclosed Possibilities.“) Meanwhile, other factors are driving costs higher. The Obama administration has proposed mandating an increase in U.S. car-fleet fuel efficiency from 27.3 miles per gallon today to 54.5 miles per gallon in 2025. The Heritage Foundation says the mandate will add $2,000 to $2,800 to the sticker price of a car. Admittedly, that would be offset by lower gasoline expenditures, but it does not account for an increase in the number of injuries resulting from lighter cars and concomitant cost of insurance.
Americans will not wake up one day to find that the technology fairy waved her magic wand and converted the entire motor vehicle fleet into driverless cars. Most likely, the new-car market will bifurcate into two tiers with auto makers packaging driverless cars for the high-end market and selling the old-fashioned dumb vehicles to middle-class Americans. And don’t forget the 10 years it takes to turn over the automobile fleet. Those two factors mean that a lot of dumb cars will stay on the road for a long, long time. Will the putative benefits of reduced traffic and improved safety materialize if only 10% of the cars on the road are equipped with lasers and sensors that allow them to communicate with other cars? One way around that problem would be for government to mandate use of the driverless technology. But another mandate would put the price of cars beyond the reach of even more Americans.
Personally, I would love to own a driverless car, especially on those long, boring rides to visit family or escape to the beach. While my wife whips out her laptop, switches on her Verizon air card and answers business emails, I get stuck behind the wheel. Grrr. If a driverless car came equipped with a computer screen that would let me play Civilization, read a book or post content to Bacon’s Rebellion, I would pay almost any price! But I suspect that most Americans would deem driverless cars to be a luxury they cannot afford.
