Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Robotics Software

When Do Robocars Become Cheaper Than Standard Cars? 252

Hallie Siegel writes: With all the extra sensors and technology that have to go into autonomous cars, you might expect them to cost more. After all, autonomous features like park assist and auto lane changing are added-value components that you pay extra for on current vehicles. But autonomous car expert Brad Templeton thinks it could be that the overall cost of autonomous vehicles per mile driven will lower than traditional cars. Not only because features of traditional cars, like dashboards and steering columns, will not be necessary in robocars, but also because autonomous cars are more likely to be shared and constantly in use, rather than sitting in your driveway 90% of the time.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

When Do Robocars Become Cheaper Than Standard Cars?

Comments Filter:
  • by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Friday July 24, 2015 @05:16PM (#50178295)

    >> because features of traditional cars, like dashboards and steering columns, will not be necessary in robocars

    That makes the question easy. Robocars will be cheaper after fully autonomous cars - with zero driver intervention - are allowed. In other words, probably never.

    >> autonomous cars are more likely to be shared and constantly in use

    Not my car. I pay the extra money to have my own seats that no one else's bum touches, my own cup holders that never hold alcohol or drippy milkshakes, and my own seat fabrics that only my kids drop their toys onto.

    • I fully agree.

      There is also a false statistic in the summary implying that since cars sit idle 90% of the time that we will only need 1/10 the number of cars. Even if all these wild assumptions come true about having a fleet of fully autonomous Johny Cabs, the morning and evening rush hours will dictate that peak utilization is a far better metric than average. All the miles a Johny Cab would have to drive in between destinations would also come right off the bottom line. A car sitting in a parking space de

    • by afgam28 ( 48611 )

      Not my car. I pay the extra money to have my own seats that no one else's bum touches, my own cup holders that never hold alcohol or drippy milkshakes, and my own seat fabrics that only my kids drop their toys onto.

      Serious question: do you avoid taxis for the same reason?

  • Robo cars will be able to maintain more constant engine speeds, minimize braking, etc., so they are likely to be more fuel efficient and put less wear on brakes, tires, and the engine.

    • None of which is relevant to cost.

      Or, more accurately, none of which is relevant to how much the manufacturers will charge.

      See, in theory, over time the cost of a good goes down. In practice, companies keep adding doo-dads and wanting to amortize their development costs, so the amount they charge goes up even when the economies make it cheaper to make.

      There isn't a CEO on the planet who would allow the costs to go down over time, because it's bad for business.

      So as long as we worship the stock market and q

      • See, in theory, over time the cost of a good goes down.

        Which specific good(s) and under what circumstances are you referring to? What specific economic theory are you referencing? There are times when costs go down and times when they go up. Or are you just spouting empty rhetoric?

        In practice, companies keep adding doo-dads and wanting to amortize their development costs, so the amount they charge goes up even when the economies make it cheaper to make.

        Companies "add doo-dads" because their customers want to buy them. They also add them because if they don't those customers (including you) will buy them from someone else. If they add a "doo-dad" that customers don't want then they will lose money. For products that don't invol

      • So as long as we worship the stock market and quarterly revenues so we can calculate executive bonuses ... the cost of no consumer good will ever go down, because the people selling it will actively just find new ways to justify raising the price.

        New PCs used to cost thousands and now cost a few hundred.

      • The auto market is one of the most competitive and low-margin. You need another example for your theorem. I can get a Versa for under $12,000 that is a better car in almost every way than anything that could have been purchased in 1980. We've had 200% inflation since then... What sort of crap did you get for $6000 in 1980? Did it last 150,000 miles and have airbags, crumple zones, a CD player, and AC?

    • And when you are late for work, they will happily chug along at the speed limit no matter how much you yell at them. Fleet operators might also decide to tweak maximum speeds to save gas money when prices rise (like airlines did for awhile), maybe even giving you the ability to select to go at the full speed limit for an extra fee. I think of the airlines as to how very cool technology can be completely made miserable once in the grasp of the invisible hand.

      I know a lot of people who really dislike being

  • Possibly as soon as you factor in insurance costs. Assuming that autonomous vehicles can live up to some of the hype related to safety, the insurance premiums should be a pittance compared to what many people currently pay. If you have a car that's only likely to be at fault (or better yet, in an accident at all if it can drive defensively well enough) in the event of catastrophic failure, it should cost far less to insure. The initial cost may be higher, but could be amortized over the length of its owners
    • Possibly as soon as you factor in insurance costs. Assuming that autonomous vehicles can live up to some of the hype related to safety, the insurance premiums should be a pittance compared to what many people currently pay. If you have a car that's only likely to be at fault (or better yet, in an accident at all if it can drive defensively well enough) in the event of catastrophic failure, it should cost far less to insure. The initial cost may be higher, but could be amortized over the length of its ownership in lowered insurance premiums.

      The article implies that the car will be in use more often, which I take to mean that it will not be owned by average Joes, but by some commercial or government entity. So one would think insurance would not be a factor of significance to the average Joe.

      • by rthille ( 8526 )

        I could see it being like solar. Some people will have 3rd parties put panels on their house and buy the power at a reduced rate, and others will want to own the panels, but sell unused power back to the utility.

        I could see owning my own car, and having it drive for Uber when I'm working. I'd know (for the most part) when I'd need it again, so I'd have it not make long trips just before I want to go home.

        • I could see owning my own car, and having it drive for Uber when I'm working. I'd know (for the most part) when I'd need it again, so I'd have it not make long trips just before I want to go home.

          I would never allow my vehicle to be used by Uber or to let strangers drive around it. I don't even let my friends drive my car. I paid almost $40k for it, but even if it was only a $10k car, I wouldn't let other people drive it without a $10k deposit.

          • With a self-driving car, it's not them driving it. It's the car. Just like when you;re in it, except they leave trash on the floor.

            Self-driving cars take Uber to a new level - no driver, no unavailability. You're not the driver, so why does your Uber client need one? No unavailability except for when you have a scheduled trip (coming home from a concert...).

            The only needed human intervention is refueling. Until they self-park on your charging mat, or park and hit the charging plug.

            Maybe you don't reall

          • I paid almost $40k for it

            I love drivers like you, you pay $40K for a car and sell them 3 years later for $10K. I buy cars like this for $10K and drive them for many years. Thanks for blowing $30K so that I can drive a fancy car.

      • I don't see how that precludes that average Joe from owning it. It only means that they'll be having it drive for Uber or some similar service while they're at work on not using it. Obviously not everyone will do that or even want to do that, but so long as it makes financial sense to do so, enough people will.
        • I don't see how that precludes that average Joe from owning it. It only means that they'll be having it drive for Uber or some similar service while they're at work on not using it. Obviously not everyone will do that or even want to do that, but so long as it makes financial sense to do so, enough people will.

          Why not do it like U-Haul, the trucks are owned by investors. They get a share of the profits from the rentals, minus the costs of repairs. At the end of its life the vehicle is sold and the investors get the profits from the sale. The investors get the pleasure of collecting profits from a vehicle that they own, even though they don't ever drive it.

          Why are people attached to vehicles? When you are commuting to work, you can ride in a one passenger mini car. If you are going shopping, or a camping trip

  • cheaper for the owner:when self-drive becomes uninsurable. cheaper for the maker:when steering wheels are an option. cheaper for the dealer:Hey! EVERYthing is Cheaper at Crazy Charlie's!
    • by tomhath ( 637240 )
      Also cheaper if it means waiting 15 minutes or learning a car isn't available when I want it? Time is money.
      • Also cheaper if it means waiting 15 minutes or learning a car isn't available when I want it? Time is money.

        I have no doubt that you will be able to find someone who will take you where you are going without waiting 15 minutes if you throw enough money at them. Maybe there will be super-premium service where you can cut in line for an extra $50 or $500 or whatever fee if you are really desperate. Those who are paying less, will do so knowing that they are paying less because people like you will pay more.

    • Why will insurance become too expensive? If mixing in autonomous cars doesn't make the road more dangerous rates should stay the same or even drop for non-autonomous cars, not go up. Insurance is about aggregating average risk and taking a bit of profit, not some grand morality play.

      • These driverless cars will be covered with advertising, just like city buses. If you damage the advertisements or cause the car to be taken out of service, you will be liable for any and all lost profits from the advertising.

  • Why wouldn't it have a steering column? What do you do in an emergency when the car doesn't know how to handle itself? Airplanes still have control yokes. Cars should still have steering wheels.
    Also, why would a car suddenly start getting more usage rather than sitting in the driveway. Are they also assuming that when cars become autonomous, that we will no longer own them, but just call for one when we need one?BR? I am not in favor of a world where i can't own a car, and where I can't take control of a c
    • by Kjella ( 173770 )

      Why wouldn't it have a steering column? What do you do in an emergency when the car doesn't know how to handle itself?

      Like a tram or train or whatever you pull the emergency brake.

      Also, why would a car suddenly start getting more usage rather than sitting in the driveway. Are they also assuming that when cars become autonomous, that we will no longer own them, but just call for one when we need one?BR? I am not in favor of a world where i can't own a car

      My guess it means you'd buy the kind of car you need 90% of the time, in my case that'd be a one-seater with ~20 miles of range. When the whole family is going to the cabin, I call and get the big, long range vehicle and it'll deliver itself to my doorstep. And once I'm done, it'll return itself. Most of the annoyance of renting a car today is the overhead, secondly it's the insurance and any scratches or fender benders. With robot cars they shou

    • Why wouldn't it have a steering column?

      Because it's cheaper to not have one, and probably also safer(on average). One of the accidents suffered by Google's self-driving vehicles was because the operator took it out of automatic and overrode it's braking in order to rear end a car.

      Another reason would be - consider who's probably going to drive these first. People with convictions for things like DUI, reckless and negligent driving, etc... IE people we don't WANT to have a manual driving option. On the other hand - it'd much harder to get you

    • Also, why would a car suddenly start getting more usage rather than sitting in the driveway.

      Besides the whole Uber-esque renting my car when I'm not using it thing...

      If you have a family, you may end up getting more out of your car by using it within the family. Picture the husband and wife where the wife takes the car to work and the husband calls the car up if he needs it. Add in some kids who can have the car take them places as well and it could spend a lot more of it's time moving around than it would with only licensed drivers using it.

      As for, "What happens if I need to use the car when my

  • But autonomous car expert Brad Templeton thinks it could be that the overall cost of autonomous vehicles per mile driven will lower than traditional cars.

    Never say never but it won't be anytime soon. The sensor package and other hardware to make it work are going to be very expensive for quite a while yet. Not only because there is a lot of R&D and hardware costs to recoup but also because of economies of scale which will not happen overnight. I could see autonomous vehicles being cheaper in specific situations but for general purpose driving it won't be cheaper anytime soon if ever.

    Not only because features of traditional cars, like dashboards and steering columns, will not be necessary in robocars,

    That's something of an assumption that manual controls will be remove

    • by pavon ( 30274 )

      but also because autonomous cars are more likely to be shared and constantly in use, rather than sitting in your driveway 90% of the time.

      I'm not convinced of this one either. Possible but hardly a certainty. A lot of people don't really like to share cars and nobody rides the bus because they like it. I can see automated cars getting abused rather badly. Trash, bodily fluids, etc. People don't tend to respect property that isn't theirs. I really don't look forward to the prospect of taxing an automated taxi that smells of urine or worse.

      And it doesn't work for the borrowers either. If people make their cars available for use when they don't need them, then that will mean that most cars will only be available for use during times of low demand, and will be occupied during time of high demand. With that availability, shared cars will barely dent the existing taxi and public transportation systems.

      I have seen a ton of articles lately pushing the idea that once automated cars are reality that no one will need/want to own cars. I'm sorry, but t

      • by sl149q ( 1537343 )

        Sure they do. A lot of what is currently done with high cost buses will be replaced by smaller automated vehicles. Those might be owned (read financed) by the local transportation company (i.e. who is operating the buses now), the taxi company replacements (e.g. Uber) that are willing to fund them for profit they can make, or by end users for their own use and possibly for leasing out.

        If they are cheaper to operate somebody will be happy to buy and operate them to replace costlier options.

    • by sl149q ( 1537343 )

      1. The UberLike service that is managing your car for you simply valets it for you before returning it to you for your use.
      2. The UberLike service also tracks damage by passengers and bills them and / or simply refuses to rent to them in the future. In any respect the service restores your car to usable condition before returning it as part of the terms and conditions you allowed them to use it.

      These are not like current taxis and buses. Much more like a cross between Uber and Avis. Uber like app but you ar

    • I can see automated cars getting abused rather badly. Trash, bodily fluids, etc.

      I can see that coming to a screeching halt when the owners of the cars present the video footage of the car being trashed by the renter in court - civil(cleaning costs) and criminal(vandalism) as well as blackballing them.

      You get a dirty car, you complain and they send a new one, then charge the last client for the cleaning.

  • I absolutely guarantee that a robocar will use less gas and have less maintenance. Simply because they will be programmed to drive well, rather than drive for fun. When the light ahead turns red, they cut their gas right away, rather than blindly speeding up for that last 5 seconds to make sure you are first in line.

    Similarly I bet repairs will be less even for simple things like oil and belts.

    But on the other side, I bet that while some people will share robocars, most two car families will continue t

    • I was thinking that it would use less gas because it would be programmed to go at the speed limit. I've noticed that most of the time people drive 5 to 10 km/h above the limit, especially on the major roads and highways.

  • I've always dreamed of this mode of transportation!

    Imagine having a car that's never just sitting idle, depreciating in the driveway or the parking lot at work, when it could be being productive all day long!

    Yes, indeed! I've always wanted a car that rather than being my own space to unwind on the drive home could be busy shuttling smelly people and their kids, smelly goods, etc. around the city all day! I could have all kinds of new coffee stains in new places because people aren't paying attention to th

    • Robocars (along with fully autonomous cars in general), are never going to happen, will never be practical [...]

      I dunno. I would buy a Robocar in heartbeat. I like the idea of being able to sit in the car and read and do fun stuff on the trip home. I do agree that I probably wouldn't want to "rent it out" to anybody I didn't personally know.

      On the other hand, it might cut down on the number of cars "needed." I have a car. My significant-other has a car. We both need a car to get to work and run errands. But I'm pretty sure we could get by with one car that would come at our beck-and-call. It could easily driv

      • So one car racking up double the total miles you would have put on two cars? So double the gas usage and tire wear to boot. And you get to replace that one car twice as often.

        • In many parts of the country, rust is what ends the life of a car. It doesn't really matter how much it is used, it will still rust away in your driveway. So in these parts of the country, it is best to extract as much use as you can from the car while you can.

  • People are way too willing to give up their privacy and autonomy for half-assed conveniences nowadays. Considering the behavior of today's public and private institutions, it's nuts.

    • You are aware that there are many hundreds of thousands of traffic cameras, and cameras attached to police cars in this country? it's almost impossible to drive for more than a few miles without showing up on one. If you see a police car on the road, it's looking at your license plate. If you drive onto a divided highway, for sure you're on camera, they put them on just about every on and off ramp. If you pay a toll, your license plate is recorded. If you park at a parking meter, your license plate i

  • by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Friday July 24, 2015 @07:23PM (#50178839) Journal

    Sometimes, a "news story" is so obviously a press release that it's almost embarrassing.

    Here's a couple of news stories that hit the wire in the past few days, so you tell me why you think there's suddenly a story about how we're all going to live in a robocar utopia:

    http://gizmodo.com/hackers-hav... [gizmodo.com]

    http://gizmodo.com/chrysler-re... [gizmodo.com]

    Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is recalling 1.4 million cars due to a security flaw that leaves the vehicles vulnerable to complete takeovers from hackers.

    Yes, over a million popular cars can be commandeered by hackers from thousands of miles away.

    This is a response to a Wired investigation demonstrated how hackers can exploit a security hole in the UConnect software installed in many of the company’s popular new models. The software has a flaw can be used to take control over the vehicles, cutting transmission and endangering/scaring the bejeezus out of the people in the car.

    People who own those millions of cars won’t all get shiny, new, unhackable versions of their rides. They’ll just get a USB stick. FCA’s recall will give people a software update on a USB that fixes the security hole discovered by researchers.

    (emphasis mine)

  • It's odd to me that most people I talk to can't get past the idea of not owning a car. Consider what you could do with the money you waste every year on car payments, gas, parking, maintenance, and insurance. Why wouldn't the future be nearly everyone taking a robo-Uber whenever they need to? In the future, driving or owning a car will be just another interesting hobby.

    • First off I own a car so I don't have to wait. No way in hell I'm waiting 1 minute when I want to go somewhere. That's why I own a car rather than waste 5 minutes walking to a bus stop then another 15 for the bus or go slowly somewhere on a bicycle. No ride sharing algorithm is going to violate physics and return the car to me instantly it's going to be the same 5-15 minute crap I purchased the car to be free from. There will be no money to be made by ownership because of supply and demand - if somehow
      • No way in hell I'm waiting 1 minute when I want to go somewhere.

        these are the people who sit in traffic for hours every day

  • So never. Well ok probably around the same time you don't have to manually map the entire route out to 50m in all directions at all times beforehand with cm resolution or the system nearly shuts down like google cars do today. If you actually had the processing power and algorithm capability of a squirrel you could run a car with a crappy stereo camera, 3- axis accelerometer, 3 axis gyro, and dual microphone like us meat bags can. All these fancy sensors are a crutch for the inability to extract featu
  • ...automated, self-driving car outta my cold, dead hands as soon as you can hack it. Which should be in about 3 ... 2 ... 1

    Yeah, never gonna get one of those things.

  • A big part of the reason a drone is cheaper than a plane is that it doesn't have to carry a person in it. No life support systems, no cockpit, no displays or controls in the plane. And it doesn't have to be designed to the same safety and recovery standards. Fire a missile at a drone and a lot of them don't even have counter measures. And if they are brought down there's no ejector seat etc.

    When we talk about drone cars... they'll get cheaper if they don't have to carry humans or if the entire car can be si

  • What is it that notorious car-drivers hate about public transport, so that they end up spending like 5-10 times more money than what public transport would have cost them?

    That is the question that you need to answer before you can make predictions like in the slashdot summary.

    Public transport has "quantization noise". If you leave for work 3 minutes later, you'll miss the bus, and end up at work 15 minutes later. Sure you can prevent that. Just be at the bus stop 5 minutes before the bus. This means you invest 5 minutes every day to prevent a 15 minute occasional delay.

    Second: when you use public transport, you don't have "your own space". This means that if you leave your wallet, ipad or whatever lying around when you step out of the vehicle, barring exceptions, it is gone. If you have your own "transport space", you can also stock it with stuff you might need while travelling (e.g. my brother has mints in his car), of that you might end up needing at the destination (e.g. umbrella).

    Third there is a cost issue. If you see the cost to you every time you move, that makes you consider it more. People ignore the: "the car needs xx petrol to drive this far, so it costs me at the least yy to make this trip". They see the filing up and paying whatever that takes as something that must be done, and then they pretend driving the car is free.

    Those are the things the car-drivers will need to have satisfied before they can be converted. And if you don't convert the car-drivers you will not have the economy of scale to have "leaving out the steering column" make a difference.

    The current topic will "solve" the quantization noise. You hit a button in your house a few minutes before you leave, and the system will get a self-drving-car on your driveway before you close the door. It does not solve the other problem. You cannot leave the umbrella in the car "in case it rains when I get there". You forget your stuff and the next occupant might take it. (or at least "where is my presentation" is not solved with a run to the car park).

    The "self driving" and "semi-public-transport" ideas will only work if everybody gets to keep their private module. Those could be powered with say a small 1kW motor and have a 40km/h (25mph) speed limit. Then when they end up at the freeway, a bunch of them group together with a "power-unit" and they can travel on the freeway at high speed. (Pay more and the "maximum grouping delay" goes down).

If you can't get your work done in the first 24 hours, work nights.

Working...