Lots of news here about:
- An excellent report about autonomous vehicles and their potential for people with disabilities, and
- State legislation and possibilities
In the world of DC acronyms, here is a new one: ACAT, or the Advisory Committee on Automation in Transportation, a committee created by the US Department of Transportation. It is made up of very high people, such as the CEO of GM, for example. I'm convinced that the reason why the word automation is used instead of autonomous, driverless, or the equivalent is to make sure that only people who know that ACAT exists will find information about it on the website, a notorious labyrinth of unconnected webpages. But I am paranoid.
Here is the list of committee members. Lots of CEOs, professors, auto, and tech members. Last I would mention the token representative of the disability community and one labor representative. Oh and Lisa Jackson, ex-EPA Administrator and a representative of Apple, but perhaps that was the Obama Administration's parting DOT gift to the new DOT leadership. It would not look good to either disband ACAT or to throw off Jackson.
Since this is a government-created committee, it must adhere to US open meetings laws. On the positive side, any slob can attend or live stream a meeting, such as the Jan. 17, 2017 ACAT meeting, but on the down side none of the corporate bigwigs ever say anything forthright or unexpected because press is present and any person can live stream and sip their coffee at the same time (assuming the multitudes of transportation nerds are sipping the same beverage I am and prefer to view such events in jeans or pajamas).
Mayor Garcetti was the only one to push the group forward and offer a plea for real action - a blueprint with measurable, planned goals - and hope that the committee will do something significant. And he was not even in the room; he called in from LA, where it was an early 7-9 a.m. Pacific time.
Some tidbits
- The labor representative showed concern, as well he should. Remember the elevator operators once had a union and jobs.
- The FAA's committee on airborne drones was cited as a successful example of a government advisory committee.
- The guy from Zoox was the only one not to wear a professional uniform; he showed up in a hat and a sweater (and pants, of course).
A nice report by Henry Claypool, the sole member of ACAT representing people with disabilities or having one himself, has co-authored a frank report for about the potential scenarios for people with disabilities as ride hailing services progress and driverless transportation looms just over the horizon.The report, entitled Self-Driving Cars: The Impact on People with Disabilities and issued the day after the ACAT meeting, goes beyond cars to look at current ride hailing, paratransit, taxi, street network and transit inequities - more than 25 years after passage of the ADA - and the sunny and gloomy scenarios that are possible when driverless transportation arrives.
Claypool and his co-authors strongly encourage the formation of an active coalition of groups representing people with disabilities and others to educate political and business leaders about the needs of this transportation-challenged and diverse population and to advocate for universal design solutions for the new vehicles.
Claypool and his co-authors rightly declare that the opportunity is now to get it right - meaning equitable - for all travelers instead of standing by and allowing current problems, such as those that the ADA did not solve, to continue.
This is an excellent and in-depth report about an important aspect of the coming transportation revolution. The Ruderman Family Foundation and SAFE (Securing America's Future Energy, a bipartisan think tank) supported the production of the report.
(FYI: This is high praise. Most reports on autonomous vehicles are basically driverless-for-dummies productions, make completely speculative declarations based on huge assumptions, or both.)
Smart Belt - some PR person said it's better than Rust Belt
Starting with the self-congratulatory name of the Smart Belt, some previously Rust Belt states are ganging up together for a better chance to obtain federal funds and to lead the way together - well somewhat together - in the race toward driverless. Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are cooperatively pushing their impressive array of government and academic partners for the testing, research of, and presumably, wide introduction of driverless transportation. Focus areas also include policy, funding and freight issues.
East, then down south and west
Maryland's Motor Vehicle Administration (the DMV equivalent for any New Yorkers) is advocating for its prominent role in driverless regulation, perhaps seeing ahead that it will have much less to do once there are no drivers. The MVA Administrator testified in Annapolis, the state capital, in favor of a bill that would give her agency broad flexibility. She also wants testing of driverless in the state.
Alabama is worried that without drivers there will be a huge reduction in state funds. There won't be drivers speeding, failing to put on lights, going over lane markings or anything else. When your state coffers depend on driver fees and penalties, it is worrisome to think there will not be any drivers. So Alabama is exploring legislative approaches via its Legislative Committee on Self Driving Vehicles, considering laws dealing with vehicles, insurance, and funding programs.
Transit-friendly Texas?
Texas has promoted itself as a business-friendly state and it continues this tradition with the state's efforts to enable driverless testing - in Houston on highways. The auto makers welcome this endeavor, but so do some freight players and Houston's public transit agency, which is also involved. (I admit that as a native New Yorker I do not also associate transit with Texas, but Houston recently did a nice job of rethinking its bus routes in a very inclusive process.)
No comments:
Post a Comment