Live data from Hacker News

Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

pandodaily.com

31–40 of 146 posts

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#31
post #17
post #13

Let's built a future with 300mph self-driving supercars and mach 20 spaceplanes -- addressing the actual desires and wants of most users (mobility, convenience) rather than imposing personal ethics of asceticism (mass transit, anti-urbanization). The author brings up a lot of valid problems with contemporary car travel (and notably none of its revolutionary advantages), but most of these orthogonal to the personal-vs…

I like high speed trains myself. They can run off the power grid, which means they can run off wind/solar/nuclear/hydro, and they are actually in some ways more convenient than cars. When I lived in a big city, I enjoyed train commuting. I could just get on the train and not think about it. I used to hate daily commuting by car. Now that I live in a smaller town, I picked a walkable one where I can walk to work. (Yea…

The real problem with cars is they directly kill 100's of thousand people and people waste 100's thousand lifetimes worth of mindlessly driving them around EVERY single year world wide. They also cost of resources and environmental costs to build, fuel, maintain, and create roads, but so do all their replacements. We can have different trade-offs when it comes to those costs but massive transportation networks are always going to be expensive.

I have always thought the future would have personalized self driving subway cars. But, it's all about what you value.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#32
This article, while well written and trying to think ahead, forgets something very important: cars are such a symbol because they appeal to one of the core aspects of human nature. The freedom of movement, the ability to choose where you go, the notion of being unrestricted and able to move about freely. Being herded on a bus is not in our nature.

Furthermore, to some degree, cars are actually more efficient from a personal perspective as an individual. If you live in the typical USA sprawl, you don't really want to take a bus somewhere. For example, one of my co-founders had to take the bus home from his office yesterday. The commute is normal about 20 minutes in traffic...the bus took almost two hours.

The issue facing the US is that our space utilization is far less compact in most places, which makes public transport highly inefficient. I'm all for more railroads and other means of getting people around, but the only cities with truly effective public transport are:

- NYC area

- Chicago

- Pittsburgh

...I'm trying to think of others, but I'm drawing a blank. Also, bear in mind I'm distinguishing between places that have transport vs. where it is effective.

As for flying cars and all those goodies, they won't happen. The reason is quite simple: if something fails, they fall and you die. The average joe is not able to properly handle a flying craft with that level of risk - and if it falls, it may land on someone.

The most promising advance so far is driverless cars. I do believe they will become commonplace soon as technology advances and they become able to handle regular driving. I personally wouldn't use them, but they would make the rest of the driving public much happier and I do expect that to be the next car revolution.

Sadly, in the US at least, public transport and flying cars are not in our future.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#33
The "let's get rid or substantially reduce cars" crowd often is comprised of those who live in cities, and have no understanding of the indispensability of cars in rural areas. Work, shopping, some level of school, advanced medical, are often in one of the next towns 10-15 miles over, with your town having one of those as an anchor.

And notice I said "one of the next towns over". Stuff isn't necessarily concentrated in an "economic zone" like it is in cities. Work could be 8 miles east, the high school in your town, and the elementary school 10 miles north. Mass transit just wouldn't cut it.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#34
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like high speed trains myself. They can run off the power grid, which means they can run off wind/solar/nuclear/hydro, and they are actually in some ways more convenient than cars. When I lived in a big city, I enjoyed train commuting. I could just get on the train and not think about it. I used to hate daily commuting by car. Now that I live in a smaller town, I picked a walkable one where I can walk to work. (Yea…

I like trains and commuting by train too. I can't stand traffic either. But cars remain awesomely effective, because they can go from point to point, and they're so competitive that trains are only really competitive if: * you're going to be traveling for very long distances (but not long enough for airports to be faster), or * traffic is going to be utterly miserable, or * the train is RIGHT THERE and very convenien…

Knowing that the median household income in the US is $44k, I am continually shocked at the amount of money spent on cars.

"Slightly less than one-third of households said they had one personal vehicle1 available for use in 2001. A little more than one-third of households (40 million out of 107 million households) had 2 vehicles and slightly less than one-quarter had 3 or more vehicles available."[0]

This is an unimaginable number of cars. Given that a car costs, on average, $28,400[1] - and lasts around 8 years[2] - holy shit.

That doesn't even take into account the cost of running and fueling a car. At an average of ~15k miles per year, the total cost PER CAR is around $8,776 per year.[3] To our 'median household', which is more likely than not to have one or two cars, that's either 20% or 40% of their income. Since average spending on housing is 30%, that doesn't leave a whole lot left. No wonder we're all in so much debt.

The worst part is, US urban planning means that people are likely unable to work without access to a car.

Imagine a 20% increase in income tax, with the money being used to subsidize an outdated and damaging industry. That's what this is. It is holding back the US economy.

[0]http://www.bts.gov/publications/transportation_statistics_an... [1]http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/autos/aut11.shtm [2]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12040753/ns/business-consumer_ne... [3]http://www.boston.com/cars/newsandreviews/overdrive/2011/04/...

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#35

Given a safe, flat road you can't beat a bicycle for energy efficiency and cost: http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/whats-the-worlds-most-energy...

If those are your measures. But a car can very easily beat a bicycle on time efficiency, assuming you're going more than half a mile. A car can also beat a bicycle on opportunity exposure. Both statements are illustrated by mine and many others' commutes. I drive 40 minutes each way, because I couldn't find a job here, but I could find a job there. I'd love to have found a job here, but at the moment my job is there.…

And that's the case in large part because your environment is optimized for driving. For me to get a car, I'd have to pay a fair bit more in rent to have somewhere to park, and I still wouldn't be able to drive to work (there's nowhere to park). And even if I could I'd have to pay £9 a day to enter the city. (Congestion charge zone, in London). But all of central, and lots of not-so-central London is within an hour's tube ride. And as far as cycling goes, there's a lot within a 60 minutes cycling radius from here.

Of course, housing prices are atrocious, but that's an entirely separate discussion.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#36
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If those are your measures. But a car can very easily beat a bicycle on time efficiency, assuming you're going more than half a mile. A car can also beat a bicycle on opportunity exposure. Both statements are illustrated by mine and many others' commutes. I drive 40 minutes each way, because I couldn't find a job here, but I could find a job there. I'd love to have found a job here, but at the moment my job is there.…

Hmm, you spend 40 minutes driving. How much time do you spend in the gym? What if you rode a bicycle for 1.5 hours and skipped both the driving and the gym? The problem with a car in your situation is contextual. You are supposed to spend that 40 minutes of driving concentrating on driving. Not talking on cell phones, not texting, not talking, not even listening to music but DRIVING. The context of where you are driv…

If more work places had showers, that might be a workable solution.

Also: "I drive 40 minutes each way" 1hr20min of driving is not going to translate into 1hr30min of biking, with the only possible exception being if you spent the entire car ride in gridlock or parking lots.

And: "I couldn't find a job here, but I could find a job there". That you can find a job within 20 miles does not help him.

"You are supposed to spend that 40 minutes of driving concentrating on driving. Not talking on cell phones, not texting, not talking, not even listening to music but DRIVING."

Yeah, and I'm not supposed to eat pizza or drink so much...

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#37
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If those are your measures. But a car can very easily beat a bicycle on time efficiency, assuming you're going more than half a mile. A car can also beat a bicycle on opportunity exposure. Both statements are illustrated by mine and many others' commutes. I drive 40 minutes each way, because I couldn't find a job here, but I could find a job there. I'd love to have found a job here, but at the moment my job is there.…

Hmm, you spend 40 minutes driving. How much time do you spend in the gym? What if you rode a bicycle for 1.5 hours and skipped both the driving and the gym? The problem with a car in your situation is contextual. You are supposed to spend that 40 minutes of driving concentrating on driving. Not talking on cell phones, not texting, not talking, not even listening to music but DRIVING. The context of where you are driv…

Lets do the actual math here....

I will use my commute since i know more of the details. Its close to the OP of your reply....

I travel 50 miles per day to work, round trip. This takes me about 65 minutes total on average. That is an average speed o 54 mph.

If i were to bike that with an average speed of 16mph it would take me 3.125 hours.

If i workout for an hour a day, which is a very considerable workout to do daily that puts me at 2.08 hours per day with driving verses 3.125 hours per day for biking. So by driving instead of biking i can still get plenty of exercise to stay healthy and save an hour per day to do other things i enjoy. Family time, cooking, programming, reading, etc.

At this point i would say i will stick to driving. Don't get me wrong, i can't wait for driverless car technology... would love to have yet another hour back per day. the train and bus stuff doesn't work out well in rural pennsylvania. cars are pretty convenient here. the economics of cars works, and has for a long time, and in a capitalist based society, thats a large part of the equation. a lot depends on your measuring stick.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#38
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like high speed trains myself. They can run off the power grid, which means they can run off wind/solar/nuclear/hydro, and they are actually in some ways more convenient than cars. When I lived in a big city, I enjoyed train commuting. I could just get on the train and not think about it. I used to hate daily commuting by car. Now that I live in a smaller town, I picked a walkable one where I can walk to work. (Yea…

I like trains and commuting by train too. I can't stand traffic either. But cars remain awesomely effective, because they can go from point to point, and they're so competitive that trains are only really competitive if: * you're going to be traveling for very long distances (but not long enough for airports to be faster), or * traffic is going to be utterly miserable, or * the train is RIGHT THERE and very convenien…

"A future without cars" looks like some of those cities and those city's problems - in particular, really expensive housing...

NYC would be a lot cheaper if you could buy up some old brownstones, give the tenants end of lease + 6 months to find a new place, tear them down and build an apartment building. It would be very simple to fit a lot more people on manhattan if we just built taller buildings.

It's politics that makes dense cities expensive, not something intrinsic to the cities themselves.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#39
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If those are your measures. But a car can very easily beat a bicycle on time efficiency, assuming you're going more than half a mile. A car can also beat a bicycle on opportunity exposure. Both statements are illustrated by mine and many others' commutes. I drive 40 minutes each way, because I couldn't find a job here, but I could find a job there. I'd love to have found a job here, but at the moment my job is there.…

Hmm, you spend 40 minutes driving. How much time do you spend in the gym? What if you rode a bicycle for 1.5 hours and skipped both the driving and the gym? The problem with a car in your situation is contextual. You are supposed to spend that 40 minutes of driving concentrating on driving. Not talking on cell phones, not texting, not talking, not even listening to music but DRIVING. The context of where you are driv…

All good points, but one size doesn't fit all. Without details, I'll say that a) I'm physically incapable of biking that far (although years ago I could think about it), and b) my life and schedule intersect with other people before and after work. A car allows me that intersection. Or to put it another way, that intersection (which is all but mandatory) dictates that if I have that job over there then it must involve a car.

Bikes and public transport are great when it works, and I'd love to take the bus or train, but the metro region and jobs and me are laid out the way they are, and that's (all but) that.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#40
To me, what would be interesting about a world without cars (or even with cars, but vastly more attractive public transport) is that it would partly reverse a sad isolationist trend that's come along with the power and control given to us by modern technology.

I used to catch a bus every day through the city, and there were a lot of strange people on those trips. Gangs of 9 year old gangster kids drunk up the back. Little old ladies muttering racist slurs at asian students. A guy who hadn't showered in so long his clothes had gone partially transparent from the grease. I don't think I was ever in any danger, but it sure was uncomfortable sometimes. I work pretty close to home now (in fact, mostly at home), so it's not really an issue anymore. But strangely, I find myself missing that chance to interact with people who I didn't choose to interact with.

It seems like every time we get more power (like by inventing an engine that can move us around) we use it to get more control (now I can encase myself in a metal shield that prevents any accidental congress with the outside world).

A bunch of technology has gone the same way. Efficient worldwide shipping and postage means you don't need to go outside to shop. Communication moving online means you can block people you don't like rather than have to deal with them. OKCupid means you can pre-screen your dates to avoid accidentally meeting someone unpalatable. You can GPS track your kids so they won't ever end up lost or at the wrong sort of party.

And those are all good things that give you more control over your environment. But they also isolate you. Unknown experiences are fundamentally scary; so scary that we feel more afraid of walking in a dark alley than we do of heart disease. Like every generation before us, we strike out against danger with the power of our tools. But our dangers are, at this point, largely invented. We're getting to a point where instead of being safe, we'll just be cocooned in a real-world filter bubble, where we never have to fear the unknown, uncontrollable, unsanitised real world that gets forced on us when we get on a bus or walk around a city. I suspect, for all our newfound safety, we'll just feel a bit unsatisfied.

I guess I've just argued myself out of believing that the future without cars is ever really going to happen. Maybe there'll be a virtual bus MMO.

Post reply on HN