AI Controlled Cars, or Your Right to Drive

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

I don't think you are grasping the demographic I'm concerned about.

Even then

-alternatives might still exist for them
-Society could mitigate their problem

In the end, if certain demographics become in some way a victim of social implications of "technological evolution that has an overall very positive effect for society at large", we have more to look at society than at technoligy.
In Europe, we would likely try to find a sollution for people with such problems, because European society's are gennerally more concerned about social justice. Since we consider it benificial for society at large, wo would consider that society could be willing to offer these people something in return for being able to continue developing an overal very positive technoligy, share the profit so to say. In the USA there is less social compassion, greed is held in higher regard and so society overall is less compasionate of the poor and the needy than it is in Europe.
Youre question can kinda all depend to what extend society actually wants to give a toss if economical or technological evolutions lead to social issues.
Think of Scandinavian people, a lot of them live in very isolated places, i'm pretty sure if the implementation of Ai driven cars would lead to some problems among certain groups of them, that their goverments would take steps to solve their problems very quickly.

 

[El_Machinae]

Fuel costs would also go down.

Likely. I find, though, that fuel prices tend not to be factored in aggressively by people. Sure, some do. Many seem not to.

 

[Mise]

Likely. I find, though, that fuel prices tend not to be factored in aggressively by people. Sure, some do. Many seem not to.

Well it was a major factor in the bankruptcy of GM. As oil prices rose and wages couldn't keep up with the cost of living, people switched from gas guzzling SUVs to more fuel efficient cars. GM was reliant on SUV sales, which consumers deserted, and GM went bankrupt. Not the whole story, of course, but a big part. Consumers did indeed switch from gas guzzlers to cars that were cheaper to run, and the switch was big enough to fell a giant.

 

[El_Machinae]

Yeah, won't disagree. We're running into an efficiency problem now, though. The GM-killing problem of needing to spend $40 per week made spending $30 per week more attractive. To get it down to $20 through new innovations would require a much larger 'bump' in efficiency.

 

[Cutlass]

Likely. I find, though, that fuel prices tend not to be factored in aggressively by people. Sure, some do. Many seem not to.

Minor changes they don't factor a lot. Big changes and differentials they do. There is the case Mise talked about. But there is also the fact that cars in Europe and Japan tend to me much smaller than cars in America, because the gas here is so much cheaper. And the Middle Eastern Oil states have many serious gas guzzlers, but the other countries do not.

 

[bhsup]

It's not just size that accounts for the mpg difference. Euro air standards are crap compared to America. The emission controls mandated in America also lower the mpg comparable to what occurs in Europe.

 

[Samson]

Yeah, won't disagree. We're running into an efficiency problem now, though. The GM-killing problem of needing to spend $40 per week made spending $30 per week more attractive. To get it down to $20 through new innovations would require a much larger 'bump' in efficiency.

Depending on your measure of "$40 per week" there are a lot of cars with much better than 50% of the fuel consumption of a standard american SUV, see here for example "Hyundai i20 1.1 CRDi Blue – 84g/km, 88.3mpg".

 

[Cutlass]

That was true up to a point, and was certainly true in the 1970s. What happened was that in America gas was cheap, in Europe it was expensive. So Americans didn't care a lot about economy, and the Europeans did. But Americans did start to care about clean air. So there was a tradeoff, with European nations pushing for more fuel efficiency, even when that meant dirtier air, (such as the diesels that were common in small cars there, but very rare here) and the US mandating emissions controls which really sucked for engine efficiency and fuel mileage.

That more or less held true through the 1980s, but in the 1990s the automakers started learning how to make effective emissions control equipment on engines that were more efficient for fuel economy. But the tradeoff remained.

 

[Mise]

Yeah, won't disagree. We're running into an efficiency problem now, though. The GM-killing problem of needing to spend $40 per week made spending $30 per week more attractive. To get it down to $20 through new innovations would require a much larger 'bump' in efficiency.

The way I see it, it's more that prices will rise again to $40, making the $30 choice seem more attractive again. I can totally see AI controlled cars being 25% more fuel efficient, especially if they become ubiquitous, and especially if they're hybrids/full electric. I mean, surely people won't care if it's petrol powered or electric if they're not even driving it, right?

 

[Samson]

It's not just size that accounts for the mpg difference. Euro air standards are crap compared to America. The emission controls mandated in America also lower the mpg comparable to what occurs in Europe.

I would be interested to know if this is really the case. I notice that the 2nd most efficent car on the list I posted above (Kia Rio) is on sale in both the US and Europe, but while both markets get the 1.4 and 1.6, only the Europeans get the 88.3 mpg 1.1 engine. Is this really because this has higher emissions than the 1.4? Or is it because we still care more about fuel efficiency?

 

[Mise]

Small note, US gallons are smaller than UK gallons, so mpg is probably not the best way of comparing... In any case, due to scaling reasons, l/100km (litres per 100 kilometres) are much better.

 

[bhsup]

It's a diesel? That may well just be a marketing choice because most Americans don't want diesel cars. Diesel is dirtier than gas, btw.

 

[Samson]

It's a diesel? That may well just be a marketing choice because most Americans don't want diesel cars. Diesel is dirtier than gas, btw.

It is, yes (took a bit of googling, the Kia site does not seem to want to tell you). There is also the 1.25 petrol that the europeans get but not the US. That is 56.5 mpg (5.0 l/100km, would 0.05 l/km be better?).

 

[Mise]

sorry I meant l/100km

 

[Cutlass]

It is, yes (took a bit of googling, the Kia site does not seem to want to tell you). There is also the 1.25 petrol that the europeans get but not the US. That is 56.5 mpg (5.0 l/100km, would 0.05 l/km be better?).

You'd have to ask Kia maybe. But one factor in play is that Americans typically don't want the smallest engines, because they are unsatisfied with the performance, particularly at high speeds. So sometimes they are not offered, because it wouldn't be beneficial to the company for the handful of units that they would sell. Most small diesels don't meet US emissions standards, and so are no legal here.

 

[Formaldehyde]

AFAIK no diesel engines meet US emissions standards without expensive after-treatment equipment. But that is not the only factor. Europe makes diesel fuel much more attractive by having lower tax rates, and diesel fuel isn't as ubiquitous in the US. Diesel engines in passenger cars also have a bad reputation in this country.

Why Can't We Buy Small European Diesels in the U.S.?

 

[Samson]

AFAIK no diesel engines meet US emissions standards without expensive after-treatment equipment. But that is not the only factor. Europe makes diesel fuel much more attractive by having lower tax rates, and diesel fuel isn't as ubiquitous in the US. Diesel engines in passenger cars also have a bad reputation in this country.

Why Can't We Buy Small European Diesels in the U.S.?

Interesting. I would note that the statement in that "Europe has taxed diesel fuel at lower rates for 30 years to encourage its use" is not true for the UK. Diesel here is ~6% more expensive than petrol, but the the fuel efficiency savings easily outweigh that. It would appear that there is going to be an uphill battle to get acceptance of the most fuel efficient cars over there. I have to wonder about the criteria for the emissions standards. I know nothing about it, but I would guess I would rather breath the emissions from 1 l of diesel (from a modern car) than 5 l of petrol.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Perhaps it takes some acclimation, but I can't stand the smell of buses which do not require any emissions abatement.

I couldn't believe the vehicle emissions in London when compared to any major US city, even LA.

This is why I think the clean-burning diesel technology being introduced by German vendors is so important to finally making some inroads in the US.

 

[Cutlass]

The Volkswagen/Audi diesel is available in the US. But that's the only one I know of except in trucks.

 

[Formaldehyde]

You can even get a diesel Chevy Cruze, Jeep Grand Cherokee, and Dodge RAM pickup. BMW, Mercedes, Mazda and Porsche are also offering diesel models in the US.

Why diesels are gaining momentum in diesel-hostile U.S.

WASHINGTON – Diesel vehicle sales could explode the next few years, hitting as much as 10% of new vehicle sales by 2018, according to an expert panel here.

That's several times the current diesel sales pace, a huge jump for an engine that's heavier, costlier and noisier that gasoline engines, uses more-expensive fuel that's harder to find and smells bad.

Are the experts sniffing that diesel fuel? Not really. There are sound reasons that diesel-power vehicles could catch on.

The first is diesel's 20% to 40% better fuel economy than gasoline. It means automakers will offer more and more diesel vehicles as a way to meet ever-tightening federal mileage regulations. They require 54.5 mpg in laboratory testing in 2025, which converts roughly 39 mpg for the "combined" rating on the new vehicle window sticker. .

The number of diesel models on sale in the U.S. already will double this year from the end of 2012, and "that gives the consumer quite a lot of choice," said diesel panelist Andreas Sambel, marketing director for Bosch Diesel Systems North America. "We've noticed that in the U.S., choice is everything."

SUVs will drive the increase. A forecast by LMC Automotive says that 26% of SUVs sold in 2018 will have diesels, up from 8% last year. SUVs are by far the biggest part of the truck market, and trucks are half the total new-vehicle market.

Here is the array of cars, SUVs and light-duty pickups that offer diesel power this year or will early next year.

Audi: A6, A7 and A8L sedans, Q5 and Q7 SUVs.
BMW: 3-series sedan and wagon, 5-series sedan, X5 SUV.
Chevrolet: Cruze compact sedan.
Jeep: Grand Cherokee SUV.
Mazda: Mazda6 midsize sedan.
Mercedes-Benz: GLK, ML and GL SUVs, E-class sedan.
Porsche: Cayenne SUV.
Ram: 1500 full-size standard pickup.
Volkswagen: Beetle, Golf, Jetta, Passat sedans, convertible and wagon, Touareg SUV.