Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow

Uhm, I guess then 600.000 inhabitant Copenhagen must be this mega-city where high-frequency mass transport runs 24/7 (a driverless metro) and people use bikes to get around in stochastic patterns at arbitrary times of day (because there are bike lanes everywhere).

It also implies people are willing to move from owning a car to time sharing a car. That's not likely, because it'll be businesses that will offer it, and they need to make a profit. As it stands, Uber is more expensive than taxis (and they undercut taxis using dank investment monies); take away the driver and replace it with a more expensive car, and I don't think they'd be able to operate cheaper. Plus, traffic comes in peaks, so that fleet would have to be optimized to handle said peaks.

And of course, a large percentage will need (and want) to use it. It's possible if the transport system becomes government owned or it becomes competitive with car ownership, but I don't see that happening. Sci-fi utopias usually don't explain why everything is going as smoothly as it seems; one explanation is that companies are just that awesome and managed to get a cooperative traffic system up and running whilst making automagic cars cheap enough for everyone, another is that the government or some other singular but benevolent organization is in control of all transport and is making sure it's standardized.

Also I might have errands to run, team sports (or I may not, depending on the weather). OR how about you having to leave early, because you have to pick up a sick child from school? Current ride sharing leaves you stranded or unable deal with unplanned events. That's why people drive.

With driverless cars, that can pick you up on demand, some of these issues go away, maybe, but how do you coordinate sharing a random ordered ride with someone? How long are you suppose to wait, before the car decides that the other person is now late, and takes off without him?

When I see a heavy truck merge a mile ahead on the interstate, I will go ahead and get in the left lane. Heavy trucks cannot accelerate like a passenger car. If I can detect the age of the driver in front of me, I can anticipate an older person with slower response time and tendency to drive slow, so I accommodate them.

In a traffic jam, I will leave 50'-100' buffer zone between me and bumper of car in front. Unfortunately, some drivers will quickly pass me and take up this zone, because people like the idea of "getting ahead". This only clogs visibility and increases braking. There are certain situations where this is not appropriate, because that buffer zone can mean other drivers getting caught at red lights. There are some tight situations where it is ideal to drive bumper-to-bumper. Interstate jams are ideal for the buffer.

If the light turns red and I can see it a mile away going 55mph, I will begin my coast with minimal braking so as to conserve momentum. Most times I never get below 30 and can always catch green lights this way. I feel even better if people stay behind me while I do this, because I am essentially saving their energy by setting our pace. Sometimes slower is faster.

I'd like to think that just a handful of mindful drivers in a jam can improve traffic flow.

IMO it's big employers that should push towards setting up large bus / train hubs in cities surrounding them, allowing commuters to only need to get to the bus station themselves. There's some companies that generate multiple percents of commuter traffic pretty much everywhere. They're the ones that should also do their part, by offering more efficient transportation and by opening satellite offices. There's no benefit in having 50.000 people work all in the same campus.