What a 160-year-old theory about coal (the Jevons paradox) predicts about our self-driving future
https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/2/24232386/self-driving-car-jevons-paradox-robotaxi-waymo-cruise
What a 160-year-old theory about coal (the Jevons paradox) predicts about our self-driving future
https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/2/24232386/self-driving-car-jevons-paradox-robotaxi-waymo-cruise
11 Comments
>Although Americans say they remain wary of autonomous driving, boosters insist there is nothing to fear. In fact, they foresee roads full of self-driving cars that are both safer and cleaner than the status quo, a tantalizing prospect in a country where transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions and residents are several times more likely to die in a crash than those living in other rich nations.
>Enticing though they are, such arguments conceal a logical flaw. As a classic 19th-century theory known as a Jevons paradox explains, even if autonomous vehicles eventually work perfectly — an enormous “If” — they are likely to increase total emissions and crash deaths, simply because people will use them so much.
If the streets are inundated with robo-taxis and delivery vehicles this could be the case which is why mass transit is even more important.
But I would add that now there is a lot of research and investment in ev vtol taxis which is something that didnt exist (yes there are helicopters but these tend to be for limited use by elites) so if these become cheaper to use that and thereby increase in use (and even though low emissions, the manufacture and materials mining etc will still lead to higher emissions) like Jevons paradox with 19th century coal use.
In other words it’s all very hopeless. We’d be better served to convince folks to have fewer and fewer children, then eventually we’re all gone, problem solved.
Interesting read. Like the author mentions, AI hasn’t gotten to the required safety thresholds yet. What will the cost be for it to get there? If a self driving car is 99% safe then it gets into a crash once every hundred trips. At a trip a day that would be one crash every three or four months, even if not fatal that’s a lot of repair bills. It has to be 99.99999% safe. AI has proven to be power hungry so far. How much electricity would it take to make an AI that accurate? How much would that eat into the efficiency of the car? Seems like these days everyone is talking about when we’ll be able to get gen AI to work and talking about trillion dollar investments to get to gen AI and multi billions building out the power grid to support AI data centers. How about getting it to work efficiently enough to be cost effective as well? Pretty daunting task for the engineers working on it I imagine.
I read about AI power requirements and I marvel at how efficient the human brain is. Still It uses 20% of the bodies calories with 2% of weight? Is electronic intelligence going to have a similar ratio? Is 20% additional electricity going to be required over a human driven electric car? More, less? I think a lot of the future promise of this technology depends on the answer.
Meanwhile the actual need to leave home decreases every day. Home delivery, drone delivery, work from home, metaverse communications, online doctor’s appointments,etc.
The Jevons paradox also works in reverse. When Hammersmith Bridge (over the Thames in west London) had to be closed suddenly, officials expected traffic chaos. But it largely failed to materialize – the traffic just “went away”. With the prospect of a nightmare drive, people walked, took the Tube or just didn’t travel.
If self driving cars reliably pay attention and yield to pedestrians, pedestrians will be able to walk more freely and cars might become unusable within town centers and cities as they are forced to continually yield. Self driving cars may become self limiting and people will wind up having to use mass transit.
I’m still not sold. Not for safety reasons but comfort. My wife and I both get significantly more car sick while riding in a self driven car than if either of us is driving.
Why are some people so obsessed with self-driving cars? If it is because of lazyness just use the damn bus or train. We don’t need self-driving cars, we need cost-efficient means of mass transportation, it’s the only way to make less gas emissions.
What people seem to miss in this argument is that people are wanting to do more, as it becomes more convenient they will of course take advantage of that…this is not a problem this is infact the goal we should be striving for, making the world a better place where people can do more of what they want to do. If we could focus on that aspect while minimizing and mitigating negative environmental impact then we can have a better, happier, more productive society.
The Jevons Paradox only occurs in extremely rare circumstances. I did efficiency consultation as part of solar sales and when CFLs came out conservatives argued that people would just use more lights if light bulbs got more efficient, When the Prius came out conservatives argued that people would just drive more miles with an efficient car.
“[Electric lights](https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2010/08/26/not-such-a-bright-idea) are often cited as an example: people have responded to improved light bulb efficiency by [installing so many more of them](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/opinion/vegas-sphere-energy-efficiency.html) that there has been no decline in the total energy consumed by lighting.”
That is absolute horse-puckey. You’ll not that the link goes to another OPINION piece, it does not link to a study showing that assessment is true.
In reality I had all the lighting I needed with Incandescent bulbs. When I replaced them with CFLs, which are twice as efficient, I didn’t double the number of light fixtures in my house. When I replaced the CFLs with LEDS I didn’t double the number of light fixtures again. Having more efficient lighting just saved me money and saved the grid emissions. For anyone reading this, do you know anyone who replaced old light bulbs with more efficient ones and then doubled the number of light fixtures they had?
When I bought a Prius which was more than double the efficiency of my old Subaru, I didn’t start driving double the miles per day. My commute and choice of vacation location did not change because of the efficiency of the car. The amount of time I could stand driving was what decided how far from work I lived and how far I drove for vacation. If someone (obviously not Tesla) gets self driving cars to work reliably I’m not going to be driving any more than I am now because the limit on how much I drive is not based on the stress of actually driving. I don’t want to sit in any car, robot or human driven for an interminable number of hours and self driving cars are likely going to be more expensive per trip than a dumb car.