How Much Are Robotaxi Utopia Promises Simply Myths? – CleanTechnica

Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News!

---

Much of the discussion around robotaxis these days is focused on how well they work and how quickly they can scale up and reproduce. However, some of the initial premises on why robotaxis could be good and helpful have probably not gotten enough attention. Bloomberg recently interviewed former director of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Jeffrey Tumlin about robotaxis. He provided a lot of very interesting answers. I’m highlighting a few specific ones here to tease out some themes.

First of all, one key point he makes is that Uber and Lyft didn’t achieve some of the key things they were supposed to achieve. In short, they created more traffic while displacing biking and transit trips.

“One of the things that I find fascinating about the robotaxi industry is it appears to have learned nothing from the experience of Uber and Lyft.

“Less than 1% of Uber and Lyft trips in the Bay Area connect to transit. But in the late 2000s, the companies made all these lofty promises that they were going to be a critical first/last-mile connector to public transportation. They believed that the existence of ridehail would allow people to shed cars because there would always be a vehicle there when you need it.

“Not only did none of those promises come true, the opposite actually occurred. The San Francisco County Transportation Authority did an analysis in 2018 showing that almost half the increase in vehicle miles traveled in San Francisco was due to Uber and Lyft. They were displacing transit, walking and biking trips, they were adding to deadheading miles, and they were significantly increasing traffic in the most congested parts of the city.”

Elsewhere in the interview, just focusing on the robotaxis that have been roaming around San Francisco, he said, “So far, there is no net positive for the transportation system that we’ve been able to identify. The robotaxis create greater convenience for the privileged, but they create problems for the efficiency of the transportation system as a whole.” So, again, while they may benefit some people who are able to afford them, they clog up the streets and increase time in traffic.

He repeated it in other words here as well: “At the same time, it’s an incredibly inefficient use of roadway space. Flooding the city with Waymos would significantly increase congestion and allow the streets to move fewer people, which threatens San Francisco’s economic vitality. That’s particularly true if those Waymo trips are substituting for walk, bike or transit trips.” There’s no way around it — driving around with an empty SUV or van while waiting for a passenger, driving to pick up the passenger, and then taking the passenger where they want to go adds up to more miles on the road than conventional forms of transport.

“It goes back to this fundamental tension between convenience for the wealthy versus the needs of the transportation system as a whole. For private AV companies to be viable, they need to target wealthy folks in dense locations where vehicles don’t spend all their time on the road deadheading.” Are robotaxis ever going to do more than serve the wealthy? Maybe. If robotaxi companies — whether Waymo, Tesla, or Baidu — can eventually drive down costs and be useful to those with less income, great. However, if that is achieved, that will inevitably lead to a lot more traffic — and that’s really not great for anyone.