Driverless cars offer little help with adaptation

by Robert McLean.

D

riverless cars offer little in the way of adaptation to climate change.

A driverless car - still at the sharp
edge of consumerism.

Autonomous they may be, a measurable saver of human lives and convenient in the extreme, but still they represent the sharp edge of consumerism and are the products of carbon-rich ideas.

Although public in the sense in that they open to use by anyone willing, or able to pay the “fare”, the driverless car is still a tool of answering private want.

Adaptation to climate change is about many things, but among them is the need to live in a way that society is able to limit/reduce/restrict the use of carbon-rich ideas that enable people to fulfil private wants.

The driverless car, as wonderful as is might be and such a striking illustration of human innovation and creativity, it is really just another way of answering further human wants with a carbon-intensive idea.

Digital Life in the Sydney Morning Herald has discussed the idea in the story: “Your driverless car is just around the corner, and it will change your life”.

According to the story, “A recent report by accountancy firm KPMG says driverless cars promise to remove traffic congestion, slash air pollution and save economies hundreds of billions of dollars by drastically reducing fuel consumption and the need for new traffic infrastructure.

"Platooning alone, which would reduce the effective drag coefficient on following vehicles, could reduce highway fuel use by up to 20 per cent, just as drafting behind the lead allows cyclists to reduce their exertion," the report says.

Interestingly, and as the story doesn’t point out, “platooning” has been around for a long time – it’s called a “train”.

A geographer in the School of Physical, Environmental and Mathematical Sciences (PEMS) at UNSW Canberra (the Australian Defence Force Academy) in Canberra, Associate Professor Paul Tranter, has argued frequently against the private motor car.

Lecturing in global change, social geography and transport geography, Prof Tranter can clearly show that human powered transport, walking and cycling, followed by genuine public transport easily outstrips in every efficiency measure the private movement of people by motor car, driverless or otherwise.

Prof Tranter’s research in global change, social geography and transport geography has made a pioneering contribution in the areas of child-friendly environments, active transport, and healthy and sustainable cities. We should listen to him.

Meanwhile, earlier this month, the same newspaper, writing in the same section (Digital Life) warned readers that driverless cars were not all they seemed.

Associate Professor
 Paul Tranter.

The story - “Driverless cars have a dirty little secret, university study shows” – tells readers about a counterintuitive conclusion of a new study to the robot-like cars.

“A self-driving car would make more trips to finish the same tasks, the University of Michigan researchers said. It might drop off one parent at work, return home to pick up the other, and then take the kids to school, return home, then start the return cycle,” the story says.

“What isn't known yet is how many people who don't currently drive, like kids and users of public transportation, will start sharing a self-driving car. Those new trips - and all the return trips in between - could mean more total driving.”

On the surface the driverless car appears a wonderful idea, but examined critically, it is simply continuing climate disrupting habits with a feel-good patina about it.