Role of autonomous government in Advancing Vehicles
This article debates how governments can encourage self-driving cars. It’s mainly for U.S. state and local autonomous government but is also helpful for other countries. The focus is not on making rules for AVs but on supporting their development. The object suggests that autonomous governments can’t just create these cars by demanding that real technological progress is needed.
Autonomous vehicles have yet to be ready for all roads. Companies need to clearly define what it means for these cars to be safe enough. In three ways, governments can help.
Administrative strategies:
I am getting autonomous government agencies ready, improving roads and infrastructure, buying these cars for government use, and pushing for safety rules.
Legal strategies:
Understanding and changing self-driving car laws and making regular driving reflect its costs. This could make self-driving cars more appealing.
Community strategies:
Local autonomous government should look at their specific needs and resources to prepare for AVs and apply for grants.
This item warns against simple “autonomous driving laws” that many states have passed. These laws often make things more confusing and don’t help. Instead, autonomous government should understand the technology and existing laws better.
Encouraging Autonomous vehicles means expecting more from current drivers and cars. This approach can apply to other new skills, too. Governments should use today’s laws and policies wisely to support new technologies.
In Context:
A future different from the present:
The “Jetsons fallacy” is about the conception of the future by only changing one thing and keeping everything else the same. Like in the old TV show “The Jetsons,” they thought of flying cars but still had old-fashioned ideas about who drives them. When thinking about self-driving cars, we should think bigger and differently, not just as today’s vehicles without drivers. This means considering new ways people might travel or get things like contact lenses, maybe even using robots and drones.
We should focus on something other than what we think people want now because new technologies like self-driving cars could change. What people want or need in ways we can’t yet imagine. Like the internet, self-driving vehicles might bring unexpected changes and opportunities.
The legal context:
Automated vehicles face complex legal challenges. Facts in existing laws, like New York’s rule requiring one hand on the wheel, can hinder their use. Society’s acceptance of automation will shape how these laws are applied. New laws can both support and obstruct automated driving. For example, Michigan prohibits automated driving except for research, adding hesitation.
Developers of automated systems often have differing views on state bills due to varying legal frameworks. They prefer legal research to understand necessary changes for deployment. Some states, like California, have processes that disadvantage certain automated technologies. Legal research and development, including public policy work, is essential for integrating motorized vehicles.
Three pathways to fully automated driving:
Full vehicle automation means they can drive themselves in all conditions, but this is unavailable. There are three ways to develop this:
- Advanced driver assistance (like some luxury vehicles have for speed and lane control).
- Automated emergency systems (like constancy control in new cars).
- Ultimately, Driverless systems (still being tested).
Advanced systems and emergency interventions still need human drivers as backups. Driverless systems remove the need for a human driver altogether. Initially, these will be used in austere, controlled environments like campuses or business districts. Over time, they will handle more complex situations and locations.
Dedicated Short Range Communications:
Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) might help develop fully automated driving. This is used in platooning. Where vehicles travel closely together and can warn of hidden dangers for emergency systems, DSRC could also aid driverless systems in specific areas like business districts. However, not all current automated systems use DSRC; many trust other equipment like cellular networks.
Therefore, that is more of an additional tool rather than necessary. The three paths to full automation – advanced assistance systems, emergency systems, and driverless systems can work with or without DSRC, supporting different uses and business models.
Advanced Driver Assistance Systems:
Established car makers and suppliers will mainly develop Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS). These high-tech features will appear in lavish cars and later in cheaper models. Start-ups and hobbyists might also modify cars to add these systems. They could use maps or data that need regular updates, possibly sold as subscription services. ADAS has particular uses for trucks and buses.
For trucks, platooning can save fuel by reducing air drag. For buses, automated routes can help drive through narrow spaces and accurately stop at bus stops.
Automated Emergency Intervention Systems:
Automated Emergency Systems are becoming more common in cars and trucks. These systems can improve safety significantly. If they prove accurate, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will require all new vehicles to have them.
The European Union already demands that new trucks and buses have advanced emergency brakes and lane warning systems. However, these systems aren’t considered “automation” by SAE International’s standards. They are essential steps towards total automated vehicles. These emergency systems are part of the more significant effort to achieve complete vehicle robotics in the future.
Driverless Systems:
Both private and public groups could run Driverless Systems. Companies like Google and Uber Power offer driverless taxis and delivery services. These can work alongside and compete with drone or robot deliveries. Places like university campuses, business areas, and airports valor use driverless shuttles. These systems’ potency is similar to utilities, needing a complex digital and physical setup like data centers and maintenance areas. People influence pay to use these services. They could also request the system to cover their driveways & parking lots, similar to getting an electricity connection.
Administrative strategies:
Prepare government:
To handle driving automation, governments should appoint a dedicated person to oversee automation issues. They are coordinating with various agencies and the private sector. Improve understanding of automation technologies across government sectors like transportation, law enforcement, and planning.
Develop expertise in complex technical and social aspects of automated driving. To consider automation, update long-term plans, including land use and setup. Prepare for emergencies related to automated driving, like crashes.
These paces need resources, like public funds. Autonomous government should treat this like investing in infrastructure or research, doing what the private sector won’t do.
Prepare infrastructure:
Governments can improve driver assistance systems. Maintaining roads well, fixing lane markings and holes, removing road rubbish, and making signs, traffic signals, and road marks clear and reliable.
Ensuring real-world road features match design values. Checking that road people follow safety policies. Ordering data running on traffic and way conditions. Recording vehicle automation sorts in registration databases. Working with the Department of Transportation on communication technologies for vehicles. Promoting strong wireless networks for vehicle connectivity. Using jamming tools like managed lanes to support automated driving. Adapting neighborhood infrastructure to be driverless-friendly, like lower speed limits.
Plan infrastructure:
Auto-driving creates doubt in transport plans. Its influence leads to either more or less traffic or road wear. Planning for the future is challenging because it’s hard to predict how robotics will affect travel habits and path conditions. Autonomous governments should consider different scenarios, like more people using cars for short flights and switching to shared vehicles on bus trips, by considering various possibilities and their likelihood. They can better plan for the impacts of automation. This approach helps focus on the most probable and impactful scenarios rather than just guessing high & low outcomes.
Leverage procurement:
Governments can use their buying power to drive the market for advanced vehicle safety systems. They own millions of vehicles and buy around 350,000 each year. By choosing vehicles with advanced protection features, they can push manufacturers to make these structures more common and cheap. While this potency initially costs more, it may save money in the long run by reducing accidents and maintenance. Teamwork among agencies, especially in public transit, is vital to boosting innovation.
Advocate for AEIS mandates:
State and local supervision can urge the federal government to promote and require more robotic emergency systems in new automobiles. They can push for more funding for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and easier legal processes for applying these rules. States can also motivate car creators to add this security countryside as a standard. In court, injured walkers’ cases can highlight the need for these systems in modern automobiles.
Legal Strategies
Analyze existing law:
Administrations need to review and possibly update laws for automated driving. This involves examining all current laws that valor affect or conflict with automated vehicles. A legal audit is essential to identify issues in existing rules, like road regulations and insurance policies. Autonomous government should also consider how these laws apply to different types of vehicles and services, like electric cars and ride-sharing. Current laws already address vehicle safety and can be used to regulate automated driving. It’s essential to understand how these laws are enforced in practice. Clarifying lawful guidelines can help developers create better-automated driving systems.
Enforce safety requirements:
Enforcing current laws can boost the benefits of automated driving compared to traditional driving. Here are five key areas:
Speed Laws:
AVs may stick to speed limits. If speed laws are enforced better, it can level the playing field with regular cars.
Distracted Driving Laws:
Suppose conservative drivers face strict rules against texting. While driving, automated car users quickly get exceptions, making these vehicles more appealing.
Intoxicated Driving Laws:
More vigorous enforcement could push drunk drivers to use automated vehicles instead.
Seatbelt Laws:
Enforcing these laws ensures safety in automated cars during sudden moves.
Vehicle Laws:
Removing unsafe and highly polluting cars from roads could increase demand for automated vehicles.
