SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The New York Times has a story about what may be a more likely future of public transportation.
A small electric bus chugged along at a slow but steady seven miles per hour when a white van, entering the street from the side, cut in front of it. The bus slowed, as if its driver had hit the brakes, and got back up to speed after the van moved out of the way.
But this bus has no brake or accelerator pedal. It has no steering wheel, either. In fact, it doesn't have a driver — it operates using sensors and software, although for now, a person is stationed on board ready to hit a red "stop" button in an emergency.
At a time when self-driving cars are beginning to make progress — most notably with a trial program that the ride service Uber began in Pittsburgh this fall — the bus represents a different approach to technologically advanced transportation.
I say a more likely future because of the following:
A driverless car, after all, is still a car, carrying at best a few people. By transporting many passengers on what could be very flexible routes, driverless buses could help reduce the number of cars clogging city streets.
Few advantages accrue from driverless cars if the streets and highways are clogged with them. The passenger(s) can curse the vehicle up ahead instead of its idiot driver. My take: The idea has some promise, especially in places where people do not have long distances to travel.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by BK on Monday November 07 2016, @05:51PM
If I was designing a society to adapt well to buses, it'd look like stacks of company towns... A 7-10mph bus is great if everyone lives within about 2 miles of their place of employment. That in turn only works if housing comes with employment. New job? New home. Change jobs? Change homes. Lose your job...
City to city transit using trains works well in such a system. Trains link the company towns. Remember - these aren't to commute but to travel.
Between the company towns... farms or something. Maybe a couple of farmer families. Just like the company towns, housing for the permanent hands. Shanties for the itinerants. Gonna need a shotgun for the wandering unemployed.
Am I missing something?
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Burz on Monday November 07 2016, @06:36PM
I don't think any city can adapt *well* to buses.
What you're missing (for starters) is that cities should be districted for plenty of mixed-use areas where housing is mingled with shops and offices. Then peoples' daily routine becomes a lot more walkable and bike-able. Lightrail can be incorporated for longer trips very efficiently... http://www.carfree.com/district.html [carfree.com]
(Score: 3, Funny) by zafiro17 on Monday November 07 2016, @09:03PM
I happen to think these things will change in tandem. People are dead tired of the 90 minute each way commute - San Fran, Washington DC, NYC are among the many cities suffering - but we're coping with the design decisions made in the 1960s when we chose exurbs and cars and roads and the American dream, etc. The newest generation is eschewing personal cars, opting for bikes and public transportation and car sharing and all that other good stuff. I'm older than the Millennials but those are my choices, too.
Cities will be forced to adapt - mixed zoning, retail alongside rural, and so on. It will take another 20 or 30 years, but the forces for change are all pointing in the same direction. We certainly can't keep going the way we're going - it's unsustainable, and the mental/physical consequences of spending 3 hours per day in your car just to go between your good paying job and the closest place you can afford to own a home are beyond calculation.
The only thing remaining to push this utopian wet dream into reality is enlightened political leadership that will ... oh shit, I just saw the flaw in my reasoning, ha ha. Oh well, enjoy the bumper-to-bumper traffic, folks!
Dad always thought laughter was the best medicine, which I guess is why several of us died of tuberculosis - Jack Handey
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday November 07 2016, @09:29PM
That sounds right to me. Even if we assume that all cars in the future are self-driving EVs, the carrying capacity of the roads is not infinite. If we suppose that we have approached that limit, then we have to expand the road capacity or eliminate trips that need to be made. Expanding the road capacity is very expensive. Eliminating trips is a zoning change to create the mixed-use area you're talking about.
That doesn't have to be destructive. It can be done through attrition. Urban planners can identify residential lots in subdivisions that have optimal placement and mandate that the zoning of the lot change to commercial (to accommodate a grocery store or retail) upon sale. Before long you have an area in miniature that provides what many have in the city now, which is everything you need, want, or desire within 10 minutes' walk. Baby boomers would fight that tooth and nail because their idea of suburban life was cast in stone in the 50's, but Millenials and younger, who have demonstrated little interest in a car-centric life, would probably go for it.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday November 07 2016, @09:17PM
Heliports for the important people, varied housing density, overall acknowledgement of the "class system" that has been ever-present in society and will continue to be so as long as those at the top control things.
🌻🌻 [google.com]