EV's and Transportation as a Service to kill Alberta economy by 2030?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

No, I can't.

Know why?

Because disruption is going to happen whether you like it or not.

And your catastrophizing around the whole things sounds like my grandparents back in the mid nineties going off on how the Internet and Nintendo will turn us all into Jello.

If you're going to come up with disaster scenarios where Big Brother and private corporations are running your life, you may as well wave the white flag on everything in life today. It's already here.

In fairness the internet did turn us to jello.

[Ozy_Flame]

Regarding the Fort Mac situation:

One can think that Uber controlled by private interests may happen and cause countless deaths, or...

One can think that the City will have a fleet of driverless emergency cars to supplement personal driverless cars, all fine-tuned to take the quickest and most accessible route out of town, based on algorithms that measure traffic, route length, etc. The cars will be deployed on command, send different sized vehicles automatically to people and families that need them, and organize themselves to move quickly out of town.

One of the easiest bottlenecks to hit traffic and highways is human error. All it takes is one person to drive like an idiot - and we all know there are many out there.

To be honest, 20 years from now if Fort Mac happened again, I expect the evacuation to go even better and more efficiently because of technological trends that are going to happen anyways.

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

No, I can't.

Know why?

Because disruption is going to happen whether you like it or not.

And your catastrophizing around the whole things sounds like my grandparents back in the mid nineties going off on how the Internet and Nintendo will turn us all into Jello.

If you're going to come up with disaster scenarios where Big Brother and private corporations are running your life, you may as well wave the white flag on everything in life today. It's already here.

It has nothing to do with whether I like it or not. To sit and say it's going to be sunshine and roses is short sighted. I guess you probably shouldn't have a smoke detector either. What I'm saying is there are major hurdles that need to be addressed.

I'm not saying big brother or the government are going to ruin my life. They already control pretty much everything.

It's not an out of the question disaster scenario. It literally just happened a year ago.

You're right people have only been positively affected by the internet. A lot of studies point out that social media, news etc has caused stress, anxiety and depression to increase. Maybe it's just being reported more, hard to know for sure. Let's eliminate millions of jobs with no plan on how to counteract that. Let's see how that affects society's mental state. These are things that need to be addressed at some point.

Just because there's some serious negatives doesn't mean it should stop change. It means we need to be prepared. Sitting around dismissing everything and not talking, doesn't help anyone. I'm tired of reading about how awesome it will be to look at instagram on my way to work. Give me a break.

Ah maybe you're right we shouldn't question anything, just give up.

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Regarding the Fort Mac situation:

One can think that Uber controlled by private interests may happen and cause countless deaths, or...

One can think that the City will have a fleet of driverless emergency cars to supplement personal driverless cars, all fine-tuned to take the quickest and most accessible route out of town, based on algorithms that measure traffic, route length, etc. The cars will be deployed on command, send different sized vehicles automatically to people and families that need them, and organize themselves to move quickly out of town.

One of the easiest bottlenecks to hit traffic and highways is human error. All it takes is one person to drive like an idiot - and we all know there are many out there.

To be honest, 20 years from now if Fort Mac happened again, I expect the evacuation to go even better and more efficiently because of technological trends that are going to happen anyways.

You may be absolutely right I don't doubt it's possible. Or it could be worse. No one is addressing it.

I know my brother didn't have more than about 20 minutes to get out. Without his own individual vehicles he wouldn't have made it out in time imagine sitting around waiting for a vehicle to pick you up while your neighborhood is on fire..

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Maybe, but we are only talking about newly produced cars. How long will it take to really phase out existing gasoline fueled vehicles from the world? Maybe another 10-20 years once vehicles with gas engines stop being produced? The impact of transport trucks, aircraft, boats I am not sure about in the future.

I am pretty keen on seeing what Volvo comes up with with their cars, and if they're transitioning their transport truck business to electric or stop producing them altogether.

Obviously there will be a cycle that the industry will go through to move away from the internal combustion engine, but now many people buy used cars? Next year everyone will be buying the fancy new 2018 models, and if just the cars would all be electric that would be approximate 550,000 cars PER month that do not require fuel, JUST in North America. Imagine that on a bigger scale, and now imagine how the demand for oil will drop per month.

We are already seeing the impact cheap shale oil has on the Alberta economy, but imagine what happens when you have cheap shale oil combined with demand for oil dropping per month and accelerating from month to month after that.

Up till now the boom/bust cycles in the oil market had nothing to do with having to fight with a cheaper alternative energy source such as electric.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by AFireInside

My brother, sister in law, nephew, her parents and dozens of friends had to drive 1 year ago in Fort McMurray. My Brother had to take his vehicle off road to get out. Not at 100 kph obviously.

Sorry I didn't realize this technology only applied to Calgary.. I can acknowledge the pros of the concept but it seems you can't acknowledge potential cons. You're right though we should all share cars controlled by big corporations and governments because nothing can ever go wrong. As long as I can check out Facebook on my way to work.

As much as I feel sympathetic for the people who lost their homes and had to flee the city, you are literally taking a once in century natural disaster and using it to set technological policies and how we advance as a society.

How many thousands of people die every month because of driving accidents strictly due to human error? How many millions have died or lost family members? How many families have been destroyed by drunk drivers? How many kids lost their parents due to driving accidents and ended up in foster homes? If you want to use emergencies or even fatalities to prove your point, you are literally arguing in favor of self driving cars. Out of all the positives behind self driving cars, none is as big as the reduction in driving accidents and ultimately the hundreds of thousands of unnecessary driving fatalities suffered every year.

To me you can go kicking and screaming into this brave new world or you can embrace it and save yourself the headache. Either way it is coming.

[GGG]

I don't think he is arguing against self driving, it's an argument against pooled vehicles

All of the things like reduced travel time, less safety features, less parts etc will drive down the capital and operating cost of cars. This will incentivize ownership.

Car2go and Cabs are the same model will a little more convenience yet car ownership even in inner cities outside of the big 5 cities is till very high. Self driving only marginally changes these things

Car ownership may decline slightly but it will be more affordable and more convenient then it is today.

The question that the car sharing pros never answer is why would. Get rid of the convenience of my own car. The only answer is cost and in current models it's still more expensive to not own.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don't think he is arguing against self driving, it's an argument against pooled vehicles

All of the things like reduced travel time, less safety features, less parts etc will drive down the capital and operating cost of cars. This will incentivize ownership.

I'm trying to understand why a pooled vehicle - driver-less or not - would have have less safety features. Care to explain?

All things considered, safety features should be even higher in scope and thoroughness since part of the disruption is letting human beings trust the software in a car to successfully drive itself. You can bet your bottom dollar safety will be front and center on driver-less cars.

And who says driverless cars are going to show up at your door with no driving wheel? I know of no models that are close-to-market that don't have a human override. So for those who are freaking out, relax.

But if everyone has a driverless car, and there is an emergency in town, wouldn't you trust your car to organize itself with the other cars rather than try and override the system? The computer is probably going to find a better route that you, especially if the cognitive AI of the larger system is likely more intuitive than the human brain freaking out.

Nobody says it will be an easy transition, but carpooling or not - it's coming, and it will be a lifestyle choice as much as a pervasive technology in the not-too-distant future.

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by Azure

As much as I feel sympathetic for the people who lost their homes and had to flee the city, you are literally taking a once in century natural disaster and using it to set technological policies and how we advance as a society.

How many thousands of people die every month because of driving accidents strictly due to human error? How many millions have died or lost family members? How many families have been destroyed by drunk drivers? How many kids lost their parents due to driving accidents and ended up in foster homes? If you want to use emergencies or even fatalities to prove your point, you are literally arguing in favor of self driving cars. Out of all the positives behind self driving cars, none is as big as the reduction in driving accidents and ultimately the hundreds of thousands of unnecessary driving fatalities suffered every year.

To me you can go kicking and screaming into this brave new world or you can embrace it and save yourself the headache. Either way it is coming.

GGG is right I'm mostly thinking in terms of the ride sharing fleet concept when I speak of autonomous cars.

I agree it is coming and I prefer if citizens have a say in how things are implemented. Just sitting around like a dope saying aw shucks guess we don't have any input is sad.

I've already acknowledged that safety is a pro so I'm not sure why you're talking about saving lives. I agree. For the record I've lost several family members and friends in car accidents so the safety issues are not lost on me. It shouldn't be one or the other. I want the assurance that if something goes wrong I have the ability to go where I want when I want. Not when the google car decides to let me.

There's also a lot of money that disappears from lost jobs, wages, traffic infractions taxes etc. That need to be accounted for as well.

[AFireInside]

nm

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I'm trying to understand why a pooled vehicle - driver-less or not - would have have less safety features. Care to explain?

All things considered, safety features should be even higher in scope and thoroughness since part of the disruption is letting human beings trust the software in a car to successfully drive itself. You can bet your bottom dollar safety will be front and center on driver-less cars.

And who says driverless cars are going to show up at your door with no driving wheel? I know of no models that are close-to-market that don't have a human override. So for those who are freaking out, relax.

But if everyone has a driverless car, and there is an emergency in town, wouldn't you trust your car to organize itself with the other cars rather than try and override the system? The computer is probably going to find a better route that you, especially if the cognitive AI of the larger system is likely more intuitive than the human brain freaking out.

Nobody says it will be an easy transition, but carpooling or not - it's coming, and it will be a lifestyle choice as much as a pervasive technology in the not-too-distant future.

If you eliminate 99% of car accidents do you need 13 airbags in a car? Do you need as strong of frame or as large of crumple zone. Safety will be paramount but the safety is created by the AI not by trying to make up for human failure. Combined with electric engines you might cut the weight of a car in half. Once the steering wheel is gone the design possibilities are endless.

I can ship myself in my bed car and be in Vegas tomorrow.

I am just disagreeing that car ownership will disappear.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

One can think that the City will have a fleet of driverless emergency cars to supplement personal driverless cars, all fine-tuned to take the quickest and most accessible route out of town, based on algorithms that measure traffic, route length, etc. The cars will be deployed on command, send different sized vehicles automatically to people and families that need them, and organize themselves to move quickly out of town.

you mean one could dream.

you really think it's realistic? every town and city is going to purchase, store and maintain a fleet of emergency vehicles for the entire city and surrounding areas?

and Azure: it may not happen often, but disasters happen often enough all over the province that you need to plan for it, not just say "how often is that really going to happen"

you'd think in the last few years you'd get that.
the fires in the fort mac region
the 2013 flooding that displaced 100,000 people.
how about the slave lake fires of 2011?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

you mean one could dream.

you really think it's realistic? every town and city is going to purchase, store and maintain a fleet of emergency vehicles for the entire city and surrounding areas?

and Azure: it may not happen often, but disasters happen often enough all over the province that you need to plan for it, not just say "how often is that really going to happen"

you'd think in the last few years you'd get that.
the fires in the fort mac region
the 2013 flooding that displaced 100,000 people.
how about the slave lake fires of 2011?

If there are enough cars to deal with rush hour every day there will be enough cars for emergencies regardless of if they are pooled or owned

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by GGG

If there are enough cars to deal with rush hour every day there will be enough cars for emergencies regardless of if they are pooled or owned

perhaps, but ozy was talking about

"a fleet of driverless emergency cars to supplement personal driverless cars, all fine-tuned to take the quickest and most accessible route out of town, based on algorithms that measure traffic, route length, etc. The cars will be deployed on command, send different sized vehicles automatically to people and families that need them, and organize themselves to move quickly out of town."

what are the logistics of making that happen?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don't think he is arguing against self driving, it's an argument against pooled vehicles

All of the things like reduced travel time, less safety features, less parts etc will drive down the capital and operating cost of cars. This will incentivize ownership.

Car2go and Cabs are the same model will a little more convenience yet car ownership even in inner cities outside of the big 5 cities is till very high. Self driving only marginally changes these things

Car ownership may decline slightly but it will be more affordable and more convenient then it is today.

The question that the car sharing pros never answer is why would. Get rid of the convenience of my own car. The only answer is cost and in current models it's still more expensive to not own.

Pooled vehicles don't REALLY work as well unless they are self driving. That is why companies like Uber & Lyft are pushing towards offering their same service but with the self driving cars.

Either way car sharing is dependent on where you live, and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with owning or not owning a car. If you live & work downtown you could used car sharing to get to work, go to that lunch meeting, etc, etc but still have your own car for the weekend getaway. For many people that would be a lot of more convenient, and possibly even cheaper. How many people on Deerfoot are sitting alone in their vehicle everyday going to work? How efficient is that? Wouldn't it be possible to figure out a self driving car sharing system that gets people to work and home faster and reduces congestion, accidents and numerous other issues that occur during rush hour? At the end of the day an algorithm will be much more efficient for the repetitive task of driving too/from work than a human will be.

I think people are looking at the world the way they know it. The next generation will adapt to the way it is at that time based on what is available and accessible to them. If it is more convenient to use a self driving taxi to get to work everyday, then that is what they will do.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I'm trying to understand why a pooled vehicle - driver-less or not - would have have less safety features. Care to explain?

All things considered, safety features should be even higher in scope and thoroughness since part of the disruption is letting human beings trust the software in a car to successfully drive itself. You can bet your bottom dollar safety will be front and center on driver-less cars.

And who says driverless cars are going to show up at your door with no driving wheel? I know of no models that are close-to-market that don't have a human override. So for those who are freaking out, relax.

But if everyone has a driverless car, and there is an emergency in town, wouldn't you trust your car to organize itself with the other cars rather than try and override the system? The computer is probably going to find a better route that you, especially if the cognitive AI of the larger system is likely more intuitive than the human brain freaking out.

Nobody says it will be an easy transition, but carpooling or not - it's coming, and it will be a lifestyle choice as much as a pervasive technology in the not-too-distant future.

Funny enough, more and more vehicles are coming out with more automated safety features. Automated Braking, Forward Collision Warning, Blind Spot Warning, Lane Departure Warning, Adaptive Cruise Control, etc, etc are all part of the many automated safety features available now. As technology improves these features will get even better.

If all those are available NOW, why on earth would anyone think we will get less of these features implemented in the future? They are afterall based on technology advancements.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

perhaps, but ozy was talking about

"a fleet of driverless emergency cars to supplement personal driverless cars, all fine-tuned to take the quickest and most accessible route out of town, based on algorithms that measure traffic, route length, etc. The cars will be deployed on command, send different sized vehicles automatically to people and families that need them, and organize themselves to move quickly out of town."

what are the logistics of making that happen?

If there is a fleet of self driving taxis driving through the city constantly moving people from one location to another, why couldn't those same vehicles be programmed to follow a specific evacuation plan as well?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

perhaps, but ozy was talking about

"a fleet of driverless emergency cars to supplement personal driverless cars, all fine-tuned to take the quickest and most accessible route out of town, based on algorithms that measure traffic, route length, etc. The cars will be deployed on command, send different sized vehicles automatically to people and families that need them, and organize themselves to move quickly out of town."

what are the logistics of making that happen?

I'm saying that the fleet will exist regardless of ownership and the type of structure being proposed is completely unnecessary And the algorithms will be the same self driving algorithms that deal with rush hour. Rush hour is effectively an situation ehere everyone wants to go the same place at once. If the cars can handle that other evacuations will work to.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Azure

Funny enough, more and more vehicles are coming out with more automated safety features. Automated Braking, Forward Collision Warning, Blind Spot Warning, Lane Departure Warning, Adaptive Cruise Control, etc, etc are all part of the many automated safety features available now. As technology improves these features will get even better.

If all those are available NOW, why on earth would anyone think we will get less of these features implemented in the future? They are afterall based on technology advancements.

I would call all of those things AI rather than a safety feature. They are what makes up the self driving car. When I was saying less safety features I was referring to physical interventions into the cars design. Airbags, role cages, head lights, seat belts, crumple zones.

The cost of cars will drop as the required materials is reduced. Therefore cost of ownership will drop and therefore ownership will be more incentivized than now.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Volvo: Gas cars are history after 2019
http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/05/auto...ine/index.html

The first major auto company to step out, We know who'll be last but Toyota, Nissan and Honda next?

This is terribly misleading. Volvo is simply saying that all future new vehicles it launches will be electric and hybrid. Existing model lines will carry on with ICE engines available well into the next decade;

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michael.../#63439d532ed9