Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Tuesday March 12 2019, @10:46AM   Printer-friendly
from the unparktilect:-the-wheelbound dept.

Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984

Stingy driverless cars will clog future streets instead of parking

It's a nightmarish vision of San Francisco's future, like something out of science fiction: streets full of driverless cars, crawling along implacably but at a snail's pace, snarling traffic and bringing the city to a standstill from the iconic Ferry Building to Union Square.

But according to Adam Millard-Ball, associate professor of environmental studies at the University of California, Santa Cruz, this scenario could come to pass simply as a result of rational behavior on the part of autonomous vehicle owners. Congestion pricing that imposes a fee or tax for driving in the downtown core could help prevent this future, but cities need to act fast, before self-driving cars are common, he argues.

Those conclusions emerge from an analysis published in the journal Transport Policy, in which Millard-Ball used game theory and a computer model of San Francisco traffic patterns to explore the effects of autonomous vehicles on parking. He found that the gridlock happens because self-driving cars don't need to park near a rider's destination – in fact, they don't need to park at all.

The autonomous vehicle parking problem (DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.01.003) (DX)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Nuke on Tuesday March 12 2019, @11:36AM (2 children)

    by Nuke (3162) on Tuesday March 12 2019, @11:36AM (#813185)

    I've been saying this for some time when the subject of SD cars comes up. The fact that they won't need car parks is touted as an advantage by the SD fans.

    I'm not sure they will drive in circles, maybe that could be set up with some programming. More likely they will be sent off to the suburbs or countryside and recalled when needed, which will double traffic at a stroke. It will be hard to legislate against that because you can claim it is going for someone else to use, like kids to school or car-sharing (another Utopian aim of SD fans). And electricity for SD cars is free or subsidised (so no worries about fuel cost), and will always be (the EV fans tell us).

    Add to that the additional SD cars due to people switching from public transport - which they only use now to city centres because of the limited and costly parking - and people currently unable to drive.

    "Normal" open road pricing, while it will become necessary for all electric cars, won't be enough to deter this. The car parking fees in city centres is far higher than that. Steep congestion charges would be needed, and not just applied to IC vehicles as now.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday March 13 2019, @02:27AM

    by sjames (2882) on Wednesday March 13 2019, @02:27AM (#813562) Journal

    There probably will be SD cars circling office buildings like sharks right around pick up time to avoid being ticketed for standing.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 13 2019, @07:23AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 13 2019, @07:23AM (#813611)

    (the EV fans tell us).

    Isn't it great?
    When someone on my side says something, I need to make sure it's actually true, or at least reasonable, before using it as a premise; such a nuisance. But if I catch some guy on the other side (no matter how dumb he is) saying something useful to my argument (no matter how absurd it is), I can always use that. I only need to cite the source with a "(those guys say)", an "(I am told)", or some such formula, and it's fair game.
    After all, if you didn't wanna be proven wrong, you shouldn't have let that idiot agree with you.