Self-Driven Cars, Possible and Wanted?

When one thinks of the thought of self-driven automobiles, the distant future is likely the image.  The state of Nevada says otherwise; last week Nevada established regulations to operate self-driving cars, opening up a boatload of ways to improve the economy of the United States.

Robert Bruegmann reports that these vehicles would have the technology to not only operate themselves, but would be faster, safer, and offer a more comforting ride for consumers.  Bruegmann suggested the two likely outcomes that would result in the technology: more sprawl or higher density cities.

The concept of sprawl in urban economics occurs when people are willing to live further from the city center, likely due to the actual location of their job or the low enough cost of commuting to the city center.  With increased technology from self-driven cars, people would have the capabilities to live further away from the city centers.  This option would grant people the luxury of a suburban lifestyle, one that has been painted as the “American Dream” over the years.

The other result of the cars would be higher density cities.  Bruegmann’s logic is that if technology for self-driven cars improves, so would other transportation devices.  The proposal of combining the private and public transportations in a form of a self-driven taxi would create less demand to drive a personal car into the city center (this assumes the lowered costs of improved technology, and in fact the self-driven taxis would be cheaper than the cost of owning a car).  The land that would typically be used for car spaces would then have the potential for housing or commercial use, increasing the density of the city.

Now, there are problems with both of the results.  The effect that sprawl has on the environment provides high costs in the long run.  Along with this, unless the technology is improved in other variables (gas or electric powered cars?) the costs of sprawl will be far greater than the benefits. 

Ed Glaesar’s Triumph of the City extensively states the problems with sprawl.  In most cases, cities aren’t built to cater for sprawl, and though certain cities such as Houston may prosper from self-driven cars, technology will not benefit sprawl to the necessary extent. (Glaesar)

The difficulties with high density cities are less of an economic cost than a social disruption.  In order to remove the parking lots, people must invest not only the self-driven cars, but the flexible system (self-driven taxis) Bruegmann suggests.  In New York City, taxis are a common form of transportation.  The assumed lower costs of self-driven taxis would surely increase utility of the taxis, but people would need to give up owning their own cars (which would still be more convenient in urgent measures), along with potentially destroying a service that employs numerous Americans around the country.  If people are willing to transfer these lost jobs to other work sectors and take the lowered costs of driving than perhaps the self-driven car may work, but that can’t be easily predicted.

As a whole, Bruegmann brings valid points on why self-driven cars can improve our society, but the biggest question remains whether society will accept the changes.  Increased technology improves productivity, but with the removal of jobs, and the environmental costs that may occur from sprawl, will people truly want these cars?

References:

1. Bruegmann, Robert. “Driverless Car Could Defy the Rules of Sprawl: Robert Bruegmann”.  Bloomberg. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-21/driverless-car-could-defy-rules-of-sprawl-commentary-by-robert-bruegmann.html  
2. Glaesar, Ed. “Why Has Sprawl Spread?”. Triumph of the City. 2011. Penguin Press.