In the 1960s Americans dreamed of an age where they would travel with jet packs. What once started as a crazy idea came to reality years later. Driverless cars are the jet packs of our era. As technology evolves two groups of people exist; those that push for the evolution of technology and those that resist. Driverless cars are not exempt from opposition. David Mindell, a professor at MIT, argues full automation is not always the best option (Dizikes). Using examples such as the space program as well as the design of full automated submarines, Mindell highlights the human factor was still necessary, especially in the space program (Dizikes). Mindell also notes the technology used towards the end goal of total automation of submarines was eventually
…show more content…
A 2016 Goldman Sachs Economical Research report found the United States alone could suffer a loss of 300,000 jobs annually once full automation vehicles are widely accepted (Balakrishnan). Those impacted the heaviest would be truck drivers, with taxi drivers and bus drivers not far behind (Balakrishnan). Proponents for driverless cars argue the manufacturing and technology industries will boom as a result of increased demand (Greenhouse). Uber, Lyft, Google, and Apple have the potential to increase earnings as the industry expands (Greenhouse). Uber stands to gain an enormous amount of profit as they can continue their transportation services while keeping all of the fare, not the 30% they currently gain (Greenhouse). Those for driverless cars also promote the idea of increased efficiency, as passengers in the driverless vehicles can multitask, work, catch up on emails, or even nap without the safety hazard to surrounding motorists (Greenhouse). In a society burdened with the need to multitask, driverless cars seem to be the way to go.
Environmental factors are also considered in the argument surrounding driverless cars. Many accidents are caused by human error, leading to congestion and prolonged commute times (Thompson). Congestion and prolonged commutes as well as changes in acceleration and braking result in increased fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions (Thompson). Driverless cars are designed to control acceleration and braking, which will improve fuel economy (Thompson). Eno Centre for Transportation estimates driverless cars have the potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 300 million tons annually
A 2016 Goldman Sachs Economical Research report found the United States alone could suffer a loss of 300,000 jobs annually once full automation vehicles are widely accepted (Balakrishnan). Those impacted the heaviest would be truck drivers, with taxi drivers and bus drivers not far behind (Balakrishnan). Proponents for driverless cars argue the manufacturing and technology industries will boom as a result of increased demand (Greenhouse). Uber, Lyft, Google, and Apple have the potential to increase earnings as the industry expands (Greenhouse). Uber stands to gain an enormous amount of profit as they can continue their transportation services while keeping all of the fare, not the 30% they currently gain (Greenhouse). Those for driverless cars also promote the idea of increased efficiency, as passengers in the driverless vehicles can multitask, work, catch up on emails, or even nap without the safety hazard to surrounding motorists (Greenhouse). In a society burdened with the need to multitask, driverless cars seem to be the way to go.
Environmental factors are also considered in the argument surrounding driverless cars. Many accidents are caused by human error, leading to congestion and prolonged commute times (Thompson). Congestion and prolonged commutes as well as changes in acceleration and braking result in increased fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions (Thompson). Driverless cars are designed to control acceleration and braking, which will improve fuel economy (Thompson). Eno Centre for Transportation estimates driverless cars have the potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 300 million tons annually