11499 replies to this topic

[Rob Randall]

It's plausible that within five years autonomous car technology will be so good that traditional cars will be regarding like standard clutch cars--a fussy option for driving enthusiasts only that the rest of us can't be bothered with. Maybe not five years, could be ten, but it will happen.

 

I feel it's going to be something like the iPod or iPhone or Facebook. You first hear about it and doubt its usefulness. But then you try it and can't imagine life without it. Or at least you have to make an effort to resist it. 

 

I'm skeptical because I remember when the desktop computer came out and thought it would be of interest only to accountants and mathematicians.

[Matt R.]

Realtors made extensive use of those early desktops too.

Matt.

[Rob Randall]

Realtors made extensive use of those early desktops too.

Matt.

 

Basically any number-crunching job. What I didn't realize that the computer's potential went beyond number crunching itself. That any task, like painting a picture, listening to music or driving a car is just a math problem.

 

When I was a kid I loved reading 1960s futurist books about future autonomous cars. They considered it mainly a hardware problem. You'd put sensors or a track in the street, like a slot-car racer. Again, what was missed was autonomous travel is not a hardware solution. It's software.

 

It's pretty easy to design a system that runs on tracks, like the Chunnel Train. Harder to write software that can differentiate between a STOP sign and a grocery store billboard that says STOP for Savings.

[thundergun]

I expect BC to be well behind the crowd on autonomous vehicles. We still can't figure out ride-sharing years and years after many other cities in our own country, so imagine how long it'll take our legislators on a topic that is actually complex.

[VicHockeyFan]

I expect BC to be well behind the crowd on autonomous vehicles. We still can't figure out ride-sharing years and years after many other cities in our own country, so imagine how long it'll take our legislators on a topic that is actually complex.

 

And our single-insurer will not help.

 

One thing that should accelerate autonomous cars is their lower - substantially lower - insurance rates.

[jonny]

Most cars built nowadays are already semi-autonomous. 

[G-Man]

I know I am looking forward to it. Not having to own a car would be sweet. The only thing I am concerned about is if I want to go on a backroad. I mean there is no cell reception once you get just past Sooke.

[sebberry]

I get bored when I'm in a car without a clutch pedal.  It'd be punishment for something if I had to use a car that showed up with no steering wheel.  What would I do? 

 

20 years from now:  Geez, all we ever get to do is sit while our cars drive us around. People need more mental stimulation, we should bring back cars with manual controls. 

 

Look, the only reason Google is working on autonomous cars is because they want more people consuming their services, more of the time. 

[Coreyburger]

And our single-insurer will not help.

 

One thing that should accelerate autonomous cars is their lower - substantially lower - insurance rates.

 

The single insurer is not the barrier - they will jump on board when needed (especially as they have to save money). The current barrier is our totally antiquated MVA, which doesn't even allow anybody to test them in BC

[nagel]

I get bored when I'm in a car without a clutch pedal.  It'd be punishment for something if I had to use a car that showed up with no steering wheel.  What would I do? 

 

20 years from now:  Geez, all we ever get to do is sit while our cars drive us around. People need more mental stimulation, we should bring back cars with manual controls. 

 

Look, the only reason Google is working on autonomous cars is because they want more people consuming their services, more of the time. 

On a bike you get to switch gears often, so if they take your precious clutch away there's always that option.

[LJ]

The union of concerned scientists did a study on the manufacture of electric vehicles and found that building a fully electric midsize vehicle results in 15% higher emissions than building a mid size gas powered vehicle. For full size vehicles fully electric produced 68% higher emissions due to the larger battery pack.

[G-Man]

I think that is not born out over the life of the vehicle and it would only be partly applible in places that burn coal.

[dasmo]

... I wonder where their funding comes from.... EVs are not necessarily better for the environment since they are still manufactured from oil based products etc. BUT they are a way better and more efficient vehicle platform and ARE better for the immediate environment of a city. With more clean energy that equation changes.

Edited by dasmo, 28 November 2017 - 08:15 AM.

[jonny]

It's much easier to manage the air pollution from a few electricity plants than the pollution from millions of internal combustion vehicles. I'm 100% on board with that concept.

 

If we operated 100% of our transportation vehicles with electricity produced by natural gas versus transporting ourselves while burning gasoline and diesel, air quality would be much, much higher than it is today. 

 

It wouldn't surprise me if using electricity produced by modern coal burning power plants for transportation is cleaner than burning gasoline and diesel, overall. 

Edited by jonny, 28 November 2017 - 09:30 AM.

[Hotel Mike]

And how about the reduction in noise pollution? That is a very valuable side benefit to EVs.

[VicHockeyFan]

It wouldn't surprise me if using electricity produced by modern coal burning power plants for transportation is cleaner than burning gasoline and diesel, overall. 

 

I think there is some loss though, burning coal, to turn it to electricity, then transporting that electricity, putting it through transformers at the substation level, then again on your street block, then again in your garage, then into your battery, finally to be disbursed to your electric motors.  So you might have to burn 10 or 15% more coal than you think, to turn your Tesla's wheels.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 28 November 2017 - 09:55 AM.

[jonny]

I think there is some loss though, burning coal, to turn it to electricity, then transporting that electricity, putting it through transformers at the substation level, then again on your street block, then again in your garage, then into your battery, finally to be disbursed to your electric motors.  So you might have to burn 10 or 15% more coal than you think, to turn your Tesla's wheels.

 

There's definitely loss. Internal combustion engines require an intensive supply chain and infrastructure as well. Oil refineries and oil extraction require energy, too. Pipelines, train cars and tanker trucks are bloody expensive. How much more lubricating oil does an internal combustion engine consume than an electric engine over it's useful life? 

 

I've always felt that source pollution is easier to manage than individual pollution, which is why I've always supported nuclear power. 

 

And how about the reduction in noise pollution? That is a very valuable side benefit to EVs.

 

You know, the only truly loud vehicles on the road nowadays are either intentionally loud or are industrial or commercial vehicles. I bet most of the noise you hear when a car drives by is tire and wind noise.

[nagel]

There's also the emissions.  TBH that's my biggest concern with continuing our dependence on fossil fuel based transportation.  I do believe in human caused climate change but I am more concerned with what the constant emissions mean for our health.

[dasmo]

Plenty of options to generate electricity too. This is in part why it was fought for so long. If one has the $$$ or skills and the right location they can power their own car....

[Bingo]

There's also the emissions.  TBH that's my biggest concern with continuing our dependence on fossil fuel based transportation.

 

All forms of transportation need to find an alternative to using fossil fuel to make tires.