Responsibility for road deaths and injuries goes way beyond Uber, but that doesn't mean that Uber is not responsible when the evidence is showing that at 10 p.m. in Tempe, AZ, Elaine Herzberg was in full view of the Uber autonomous vehicle (AV). Certainly Uber should feel the pain if it indeed placed any driver or vehicle on the road that were incapable of safe operation on a public road.
But there is plenty of room for responsibility - blame, actually - to go around.
Streets designed for death
We have streets that are designed for speeds exceeding the speed limit. Almost every otherwise law-abiding person who drives does so at rates above the legal speed limit. From early reports, Uber's software had learned or been taught to replicate this unfortunate and unsafe human practice.
And deaths and injuries are so completely foreseeable because they happen every day some place in the US and around the globe. We are all responsible because as a society, we Americans have not pushed for a truly safe and multimodal transportation system and we have acted as if roadway deaths are a routine cost of living.
Pedestrians unsafe almost everywhere
Our outrage over the Uber killing should extend to ALL pedestrian deaths, most of which garner little or no news coverage. People walk, bike, and roll wheelchairs on the side of roads or across roads - without any or adequate traffic signals or intersection or mid-block crosswalks - because there is no option if one travels in most US communities without a car or light truck.
We have prioritized one mode of travel and one skill for operating one kind of machinery to such an extent that there is almost no other choice in most places, whether for transit, intercity bus, walking, biking, or ridehailing.
And it's crappier for people with disabilities
Imagine what it must be like to be blind, cognitively impaired, or to rely on a wheelchair in a country where, for the most part, outside of a limited number of neighborhoods in major cities, one is a second or third-class citizen in terms of accessing jobs, education, and even medical care, if one does not drive or have family with the resources and the flexibility to play chauffeur.
I do not know anything about the deceased Elaine Herzberg or how she came to be homeless and walking on an Arizona road late at night with her bicycle and other belongings, but I do know that like people walking, biking, or rolling wheelchairs along other other roads across the US, Ms. Herzberg found herself on a road in Tempe, AZ, that was not made for walking or any other mode except one.
Sun shows through clouds and music begins
I hope and I advocate that as part of the safety improvement AVs will bring with its transportation revolution and its billions in investment that we will spend some money on ensuring that our roads are safe for all modes and that we create a transportation network that is much more accessible to non-vehicle owners and drivers than it is now.
End of rant - for today.
Thursday, March 22, 2018
Monday, March 19, 2018
AV Developments Look Good for Drinking and Transit - but maybe not both at the same time
Buses, drinking, and sleek accessible vehicles are all around in autonomous vehicles (AVs) news these days. Maybe if I can't keep up, I can share in the alcohol industry's euphoria about the prospects of ditching the designated driver and the inebriated driver for guilt-free evenings of fine wine, craft beers, and/or drunkenness.
Why not have another glass of wine or four beers?
Both the alcohol industry and those who fight against drunk driving are advocating in favor of AVs. According to a Washington Post article:
Or take the bus - driverless - to or at the airport
The UK and Australia are both considering airport-related AV bus services. Gatwick Airport, near London, will pilot the AV equivalent of an airport shuttle. The summer of 2018 will see the beginning of a six-month trial.
Australia has a much more ambitious AV project under discussion - an AV bus rapid transit (BRT) route to an airport with a dedicated lane - so that travelers will not be slowed down by auto traffic. This plan is so cool because it would integrate BRT with AV technology and combine them in a scheme that would be much cheaper than a rail train-to-the-plane project. Look at the post because there is a neat video that envisions the ambitious plan for Liverpool, a city in Australia, to the soon-to-be-built Western Sydney Airport.
Down in the heart of Texas
As I have said before, it is outside the major cities that AVs are progressing in terms of excitement and concrete plans. A Texas city illustrates the point that while New York City has no public document about AV strategy or large-scale AV service, smaller communities are planning publicly-available transportation for the AV age.
Frisco, TX, a suburb in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, will have an autonomous bus this year. The AV bus was mentioned at a town hall meeting. An official announcement is expected soon.
Why not have another glass of wine or four beers?
Both the alcohol industry and those who fight against drunk driving are advocating in favor of AVs. According to a Washington Post article:
Without the need to drive home after a night at the bar, drinkers could also consume far more. And that will boost alcohol sales, one analysis predicts, by as much as $250 billion.
“It makes a lot of sense that the industry is interested,” said Jim Watson, a senior beverage analyst at Rabobank, a multinational finance firm. “It’s a win-win for them: Self-driving cars could boost alcohol sales and simultaneously reduce drunk driving.”Apparently, alcohol retailers also make significantly more money if you purchase drinks, beer, or wine at a restaurant or a bar than if you buy at a store.
Or take the bus - driverless - to or at the airport
The UK and Australia are both considering airport-related AV bus services. Gatwick Airport, near London, will pilot the AV equivalent of an airport shuttle. The summer of 2018 will see the beginning of a six-month trial.
Australia has a much more ambitious AV project under discussion - an AV bus rapid transit (BRT) route to an airport with a dedicated lane - so that travelers will not be slowed down by auto traffic. This plan is so cool because it would integrate BRT with AV technology and combine them in a scheme that would be much cheaper than a rail train-to-the-plane project. Look at the post because there is a neat video that envisions the ambitious plan for Liverpool, a city in Australia, to the soon-to-be-built Western Sydney Airport.
Down in the heart of Texas
As I have said before, it is outside the major cities that AVs are progressing in terms of excitement and concrete plans. A Texas city illustrates the point that while New York City has no public document about AV strategy or large-scale AV service, smaller communities are planning publicly-available transportation for the AV age.
Frisco, TX, a suburb in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, will have an autonomous bus this year. The AV bus was mentioned at a town hall meeting. An official announcement is expected soon.
Tuesday, March 13, 2018
AVs Through the Lens of Politics
In the past couple of weeks, political fissures in the autonomous vehicle (AV) world have become crystal clear. Prior to recent statements, representatives and others from vastly separate places on the political spectrum have reached consensus on AVs, but as experience this term in the US Senate demonstrates, loud voices opposing AV policy and legislation as well as current statements from the President's Administration show that consensus is under attack.
USDOT stands out of the way of business
The US Secretary of Transportation, Elaine Chao, and her cadre of modal agency leaders at the US Department of Transportation, are all on the same page in their hopes for autonomous vehicles (AVs) and their attitude about government's role. They all did a nice job a couple of weeks ago at the public show of friendly solidarity at a large gathering in the USDOT building.
The USDOT Secretary, who is also the Senate Majority Leader's wife, and her modal agency leaders all declare that government should stay out of the way of the private sector to develop new technology and improved technology as well as reconfigured vehicles and business models. One point of caution that each USDOT official made, however, was the importance of safety - but without any word that government should take a particularly active role.
Lip service to people with disabilities and older adults
USDOT stands out of the way of business
The US Secretary of Transportation, Elaine Chao, and her cadre of modal agency leaders at the US Department of Transportation, are all on the same page in their hopes for autonomous vehicles (AVs) and their attitude about government's role. They all did a nice job a couple of weeks ago at the public show of friendly solidarity at a large gathering in the USDOT building.
The USDOT Secretary, who is also the Senate Majority Leader's wife, and her modal agency leaders all declare that government should stay out of the way of the private sector to develop new technology and improved technology as well as reconfigured vehicles and business models. One point of caution that each USDOT official made, however, was the importance of safety - but without any word that government should take a particularly active role.
Lip service to people with disabilities and older adults
Every USDOT official uttered the magical, but quite general, incantation that AVs will bring freedom and independence to people with disabilities and older adults. But the devil is in the details and I did not hear anything about encouraging or requiring multiple and redundant interfaces that take into account different types of disabilities (or even preferences for interfaces). I heard zero about finally extending the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or otherwise mandating universal accessibility for all - or even a healthy percentage - of AVs sold, leased, or placed on the street for service within the United States. Nada.
The same goes for the presumption of improved mobility for those on the low end of the economic spectrum. Vague comments about the magic of AVs, but without any details.
But USDOT invited in interesting voices
Though USDOT modal officials all spoke from the same playbook, the invited voices did talk about encouragement of shared-use modes, reduction in VMT (vehicle miles traveled), the need for additional technology to manage roads, the importance of parking policy and fees, and the question of what will happen in rural areas. The trucking association in the US also appeared on the dais, though it remained with its old trope about how we will be employing drivers for decades to come.
R Street versus letter to Senate leaders
Two diametrically opposed documents were released in the last couple of weeks that demonstrate how far apart advocacy is on AV policy. One document is from the R Street Policy Study No. 134, spouting the wise alignments that the private sector preternaturally produces, versus the Letter to Senate Leaders on Driverless Car Bill, spouting a bunch of safety and consumer protection reasons for waiting on national AV legislation. Both come to some wrong conclusions.
R Street's report mostly examines ridehailing and it is almost uniformly against all regulation by way of examining the shared-use transportation industry issues of safety, labor, fees, licensing, and insurance, among others. It does not address people on the margins of the current transportation system who need policy and legal encouragement, even subsidies, to achieve transportation equity. It does not examine issues of public health when criticizing ridehailing companies for declaring that cities should discourage car ownership (self-serving as such statements are when uttered by the expected beneficiaries of such policies).
The AV issues that R Street takes the most time with regarding AVs are privacy and cybersecurity. It's knee-jerk reaction throughout the report and in this context is to say that "we should be careful not to overreact and impose stringent new regulations that could harm responsible business practices." R Street may be correct in saying that we already have legal protections in laws and regulations, but it does not discuss whether those have been enforced sufficiently and whether they have been effective.
Letter brought to you by the word "no"
How advocates for safety can write the Letter to Senate Leaders on Driverless Car Bill with a straight face is beyond me. I'll be the first to say that the federal government has a role - a substantial role - in ensuring that AVs will be safe, BUT for safety and consumer advocates to conveniently forget that human-operated vehicles cause tens of thousands of deaths and millions of injuries each year detracts from the credibility of their arguments - in my opinion.
These signers of the letter include advocates from the fields of public health, biking and walking, law enforcement, environmentalists, consumer advocacy, and road safety. What is interesting is that the signers do not represent a broad coalition from any of those particular fields. In fact, proponents of national legislation include many groups representing people with disabilities and advocates against human driving while under the influence of intoxicants.
In terms of the letter, the message is that we should not have untested vehicles operating on public roads. (Again, with car companies self-certifying FMVSS compliance, we pretty much already have that system.) The letter is against the lack of performance standards as part of the House and Senate bills - or requiring their development and implementation at the USDOT. The lack of performance standards includes not even the equivalent - my words - of the driving test that 16 year olds are required to take before being licensed to drive or even your average DMV vision test.
The letter seems to back, without explicitly saying so, California's regulatory approach, while stating expressly that providing consumers with information is not a substitute for federal safety standards. The letter is against preemption of state and local regulation and in favor of encouraging vehicle designs that are accessible for people with disabilities. And the letter actually spells that out, though only in terms of physical accessibility and not in terms of accessibility and redundancy of interfaces.
What I like
I am fully on board with the letter's stand on extending federal AV legislation to cover SAE level 2 - Telsa equivalent - vehicles. There are more and more distracted drivers in those vehicles every day who are not ready in a split second to take over operation of their vehicles. And there are more and more of these vehicles on our roads with every new car purchase.
Letter brought to you by the word "no"
How advocates for safety can write the Letter to Senate Leaders on Driverless Car Bill with a straight face is beyond me. I'll be the first to say that the federal government has a role - a substantial role - in ensuring that AVs will be safe, BUT for safety and consumer advocates to conveniently forget that human-operated vehicles cause tens of thousands of deaths and millions of injuries each year detracts from the credibility of their arguments - in my opinion.
These signers of the letter include advocates from the fields of public health, biking and walking, law enforcement, environmentalists, consumer advocacy, and road safety. What is interesting is that the signers do not represent a broad coalition from any of those particular fields. In fact, proponents of national legislation include many groups representing people with disabilities and advocates against human driving while under the influence of intoxicants.
In terms of the letter, the message is that we should not have untested vehicles operating on public roads. (Again, with car companies self-certifying FMVSS compliance, we pretty much already have that system.) The letter is against the lack of performance standards as part of the House and Senate bills - or requiring their development and implementation at the USDOT. The lack of performance standards includes not even the equivalent - my words - of the driving test that 16 year olds are required to take before being licensed to drive or even your average DMV vision test.
The letter seems to back, without explicitly saying so, California's regulatory approach, while stating expressly that providing consumers with information is not a substitute for federal safety standards. The letter is against preemption of state and local regulation and in favor of encouraging vehicle designs that are accessible for people with disabilities. And the letter actually spells that out, though only in terms of physical accessibility and not in terms of accessibility and redundancy of interfaces.
What I like
I am fully on board with the letter's stand on extending federal AV legislation to cover SAE level 2 - Telsa equivalent - vehicles. There are more and more distracted drivers in those vehicles every day who are not ready in a split second to take over operation of their vehicles. And there are more and more of these vehicles on our roads with every new car purchase.
Monday, March 12, 2018
AV Trucking at a Highway Near You
Dear truck drivers,
The argument truck manufacturers and tech companies are making in favor of autonomous vehicle technology driving trucks - and to replace your jobs - are that it is impossible to hire and retain enough drivers and that truck driving is the most dangerous job in America, so AV technology will save lives - unemployed lives.
Read below and get working on Plan B because that big rig job might not be there in a few years.
Already happening
Uber has been sending AV trucks on Arizona roads for the past few months. Why it has taken this long to hit the airwaves, don't ask me. Arizona has been completely off hands, no pun intended, on AVs from the beginning. I am listing two articles that give details. about the trucking testing, again on regular roads.
Ford - Miami by 2021
Ford is going for colorful, loud Miami to test its AVs and pilot its "business model with human-driven vehicles doing things like delivering Domino’s pizza and Postmates."
Japan could beat bad pizza to the punch. This week, Japan has a pilot of AV delivery trucks on public roads for its post office company. Actual service is planned for 2020.
Starsky without Hutch
Just a little bad 70s humor there with Starsky and Hutch. I'm not talking 70s TV, but autonomous trucks. Starsky Robotics, a startup AV trucking technology company, is not really producing AV tech, though it is enabling driverless trucking. According to a good article in the San Fransisco Chronicle, Starsky has produced a system for remote-control - by humans - operation of trucks.
This is really partially autonomous, Tesla-autopilot with a remote driver hired to take care of those driving situations that the technology is not up to at the moment. "Starsky’s plan: Hire truck drivers to sit in a remote control center, using video-game-like controls to navigate trucks from distribution centers to highways and vice versa. The remote operators would also oversee the long-haul part of the trip, helping with lane merges and navigating between different roads, for instance."
Yes, now I am compelled to put in the intro video from the TV show.
The argument truck manufacturers and tech companies are making in favor of autonomous vehicle technology driving trucks - and to replace your jobs - are that it is impossible to hire and retain enough drivers and that truck driving is the most dangerous job in America, so AV technology will save lives - unemployed lives.
Read below and get working on Plan B because that big rig job might not be there in a few years.
Already happening
Uber has been sending AV trucks on Arizona roads for the past few months. Why it has taken this long to hit the airwaves, don't ask me. Arizona has been completely off hands, no pun intended, on AVs from the beginning. I am listing two articles that give details. about the trucking testing, again on regular roads.
- https://www.engadget.com/2018/03/06/uber-self-driving-trucks-deliveries-arizona/ and
- https://www.usnews.com/news/technology/articles/2018-03-06/ubers-self-driving-trucks-haul-cargo-on-arizona-highways
Ford - Miami by 2021
Ford is going for colorful, loud Miami to test its AVs and pilot its "business model with human-driven vehicles doing things like delivering Domino’s pizza and Postmates."
Japan could beat bad pizza to the punch. This week, Japan has a pilot of AV delivery trucks on public roads for its post office company. Actual service is planned for 2020.
Starsky without Hutch
This is really partially autonomous, Tesla-autopilot with a remote driver hired to take care of those driving situations that the technology is not up to at the moment. "Starsky’s plan: Hire truck drivers to sit in a remote control center, using video-game-like controls to navigate trucks from distribution centers to highways and vice versa. The remote operators would also oversee the long-haul part of the trip, helping with lane merges and navigating between different roads, for instance."
Yes, now I am compelled to put in the intro video from the TV show.
Wednesday, March 7, 2018
AV Ridehailing = 70s Brooklyn
The future has already happened and it is 1970s Brooklyn. Imagine a world with a subway system, lots of transit buses, taxis and car services. Car services were (maybe still are) these businesses that voila! produced a car - with a driver - within five minutes of when you called. No one ever had to drive.
Dads of high school students loved this because they did not have to get out of bed at some late hour to retrieve their kids. Of course, since we thought the drivers were creepy, we usually ended up sleeping over at friends' houses so that no one had to be the last kid in the car with the driver. My grandmother and her friends used the buses and car services to go everywhere.
Now the world is catching up. Soon everyone can achieve the nirvana of my hometown - except that it will not be so heavenly with a few big competitors and the permanent travails of lack of transit funding likely to continue. Here are some players that have announced on-the-street AV service to launch within the next few years.
Caveats - No word from any car manufacturer or AV technology company about AV ridehailing that will be accessible for people with disabilities. And that's another thing, these companies are all talking about cities, but no one is volunteering to serve rural communities or people with disabilities. Maybe we still are in the 1970s.
Uber is not waiting
Uber is already on the streets of San Francisco providing AV rides - but only for its self-driving staff. I wonder if there's a clause in the employee manual about relinquishing the right to sue. The rides, by the way, are free, so I'm not sure about applicability of federal or state laws or regulations when no money is changing hands and the ride is kind of, sort of, part of the job. Don't get too excited.
Happening in China and Japan
Pony.ai is starting an AV ridehailing service in China. "its fleet is running a nearly two-mile route in Nansha, Guangzhou, where its China HQ is located."
Meanwhile in Japan, "Nissan and Japanese telecom company DeNA [started] a field test of driverless Easy Ride taxis ... on March 5, offering rides to passengers along a fixed 2.7-mile route between the Nissan headquarters and the Yokohama World Porters shopping center." The ridehailing service that is planned is not expected to be in operation until at least 2020.
Waymo in 2019
GM date uncertain for heading to the big apple
News of GM bringing AV ridehailing to lower Manhattan in New York City is the product of good journalist digging. Tribeca Citizen, a neighborhood news source, looked into GM's leasing of office space and discovered that the party named in the lease is none other than "GM Cruise LLC, commonly referred to as Cruise or Cruise Automation." This follows Gov. Cuomo's announcement in October that GM will be doing testing in Manhattan at some unspecified 2018 date.
May Mobility goes for quick trip - shouldn't you walk? - market
May Mobility also scored a big win by getting Tampa's transit agency on board for a pilot with this newcomer AV producer's shuttle. Testing began this week and the pilot for regular riders will commence later in 2018.
Toyota and BMW are funding some May Mobility activity involving "plans to use the seed money to expand in Texas and Florida — states that don’t require a safety driver." This involves some one kilometer routes. Am I missing something or isn't that a short walk - unless we are talking inclement weather? Really inclement weather.
Dads of high school students loved this because they did not have to get out of bed at some late hour to retrieve their kids. Of course, since we thought the drivers were creepy, we usually ended up sleeping over at friends' houses so that no one had to be the last kid in the car with the driver. My grandmother and her friends used the buses and car services to go everywhere.
Now the world is catching up. Soon everyone can achieve the nirvana of my hometown - except that it will not be so heavenly with a few big competitors and the permanent travails of lack of transit funding likely to continue. Here are some players that have announced on-the-street AV service to launch within the next few years.
Caveats - No word from any car manufacturer or AV technology company about AV ridehailing that will be accessible for people with disabilities. And that's another thing, these companies are all talking about cities, but no one is volunteering to serve rural communities or people with disabilities. Maybe we still are in the 1970s.
Uber is not waiting
Uber is already on the streets of San Francisco providing AV rides - but only for its self-driving staff. I wonder if there's a clause in the employee manual about relinquishing the right to sue. The rides, by the way, are free, so I'm not sure about applicability of federal or state laws or regulations when no money is changing hands and the ride is kind of, sort of, part of the job. Don't get too excited.
As is true for all self-driving vehicles on California public roads, the cars will have backup drivers. The Department of Motor Vehicles recently created a system for companies to test self-driving cars without backup drivers but has not yet issued permits for it.No doubt Uber will be ready to submit one of those no-human-backup-driver permits.
Happening in China and Japan
Pony.ai is starting an AV ridehailing service in China. "its fleet is running a nearly two-mile route in Nansha, Guangzhou, where its China HQ is located."
Meanwhile in Japan, "Nissan and Japanese telecom company DeNA [started] a field test of driverless Easy Ride taxis ... on March 5, offering rides to passengers along a fixed 2.7-mile route between the Nissan headquarters and the Yokohama World Porters shopping center." The ridehailing service that is planned is not expected to be in operation until at least 2020.
Waymo in 2019
Okay, the date is unspecified, but it looks like Arizona and California will see completely no-human-driver AV ridehailing service first. Waymo has partnered with MADD - Mothers Against Drunk Drivers - and groups representing seniors and people who are blind to join in an advertising campaign about the benefits of AV transportation.
Waymo's application to remove the human driver as backup has already been submitted in Arizona - and approved. Word is that ridehailing will begin in 2019. No date or locations have been announced.
Waymo's application to remove the human driver as backup has already been submitted in Arizona - and approved. Word is that ridehailing will begin in 2019. No date or locations have been announced.
GM date uncertain for heading to the big apple
News of GM bringing AV ridehailing to lower Manhattan in New York City is the product of good journalist digging. Tribeca Citizen, a neighborhood news source, looked into GM's leasing of office space and discovered that the party named in the lease is none other than "GM Cruise LLC, commonly referred to as Cruise or Cruise Automation." This follows Gov. Cuomo's announcement in October that GM will be doing testing in Manhattan at some unspecified 2018 date.
May Mobility goes for quick trip - shouldn't you walk? - market
May Mobility also scored a big win by getting Tampa's transit agency on board for a pilot with this newcomer AV producer's shuttle. Testing began this week and the pilot for regular riders will commence later in 2018.
Toyota and BMW are funding some May Mobility activity involving "plans to use the seed money to expand in Texas and Florida — states that don’t require a safety driver." This involves some one kilometer routes. Am I missing something or isn't that a short walk - unless we are talking inclement weather? Really inclement weather.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)