Why Driverless Cars Are a Climate Solution
Sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture
Ever since Ford shut down its autonomous vehicle initiative known as Argo AI recently, there have been increasing questions about the viability of driverless cars. Advocates can be breathless about the possibilities of these vehicles, yet as Consumer Reports just reported, no consumer can buy an autonomous vehicle at this time. There are driver-assist packages in consumer vehicles, including Tesla, but they are not fully autonomous. At least, not yet.
For my part, I am cheering on the development of driverless cars because of their ability to transform a major part of the greenhouse gas (GHG) profile of modern cities. According to EPA, 27% of GHG emissions come from transportation — the lion’s share of that being from consumer vehicle usage. We already know that if we replace internal combustion engines (ICE) with electric vehicles (EV), and then provide electricity with renewable energy, we can make a big change in transportation emissions. But I am much more intrigued by the knock-on effects of a transformed society, and what could be saved in that way. Before we get to the actual savings, however, let’s consider the transformation that is coming.
It could be a very new world
Imagine this: You live in a city in which passenger cars are no longer used. Instead, passenger transportation is conducted in private driverless vehicles hailed on a cellphone app and reliably appear within 60 seconds to pick you up. These vehicles rule the streets because everyone depends on them. They patiently give you time to load your groceries, they integrate perfectly into and out of traffic, and they have made rides more efficient to get from one place to another. These urban fleets are a staple of how modern cities run.
This new transportation approach is easily adopted because it is a boon for consumers. The cost of car ownership goes to zero — no gas, no repairs, no maintenance, no insurance, and no car payments. Driverless cars are far less expensive than traditional taxis because the cost of the driver is eliminated and utilization rates create an attractive ROI for fleet owners, thereby reducing costs to riders. It is so attractive and easy that there is no incentive to own a car anymore. Adoption nears 100%.
Okay, that’s the vision. But what would this mean for climate change?
Four big benefits for the climate
First and most obviously, the gas-burning cars of the past are no longer on the streets of such a modern city. This eliminates 95% of carbon monoxide and reduces other greenhouse gases produced by burning gasoline.
Second, the largest market for oil — gasoline — would be virtually eliminated. Gasoline makes up 45% of the total market for oil, and with the replacement of ICE vehicles, that market disappears. Demand for oil drops 45%, and therefore oil exploration, production, refining, and transportation drop as well. The elimination of ICEs also eliminates the need for engine oil.
Third, the total production of automobile units would be reduced drastically. In 2022, there were 284 million registered vehicles in the US alone. Most of these vehicles are parked most of the time — 95% according to Fortune. I could not find good data on the maximum number of vehicles actually on the road at a given moment, but we know intuitively it is much, much lower than all the cars registered — probably 90% or more. But let’s assume it is 80%. Rather than 284 million vehicles in the US, you would have 56.8 million vehicles. Hence, the GHG emissions from the auto manufacturing and auto parts industry would also drop by 80%. Eighty percent less steel, 80% fewer tires, 80% less upholstery, and 80% less car-based electronics. None of those parts need to be shipped anymore either.
Fourth, parking lots would vanish and with them the idling cars, the looking for a place to park, and the asphalt, which is another product that comes from oil. Parking lot lighting would no longer be needed, and parking garages in urban areas, hotels, office buildings, and apartment buildings would no longer need to be constructed.
I’m sure there would be other effects I am not thinking of, but these are some of the most obvious. If you think of others, please add them to the comments.
What about the negatives?
To start with, let’s admit that this vision is not yet available. The test fleets of driverless taxis in San Francisco are not quite where people want them. Rides can be jerky, slow, seem confused, and intermittent. Then again, all technology implementations start this way compared to their ultimate states. Henry Ford, after all, could never have imagined all the features in the cars we drive today.
The negative impacts on climate for the changes I have outlined are much harder to determine because they depend on the state of the technology used to accomplish this vision. Using today’s technology, one would have to account for the growth in lithium mining capacity, refining, processing, and transportation. A steady ramp-up in the onboard sensors and AI to guide the vehicles would be needed, too, and I am not sure of those environmental impacts.
On the other hand, the impacts could be radically different. Let’s say, for example, that rather than lithium-ion batteries, the system is built on hydrogen fuel cells or utilizes batteries made from seawater. It would remain to be seen what new infrastructure would need to be built to support these approaches, so the ultimate impact on GHG emissions would be highly speculative.
The single biggest new source of emissions would be those from the early stages of building the renewable energy system. This investment would continue until renewable energy was big enough to build the next set of panels, wind turbines, or what have you. We need to invest not only dollars into new renewables, but also some degree of sunk emissions costs to get solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear energy sources online. But honestly, that’s a small price to pay since the alternative is building more systems that require fossil fuel burning.
Conclusion
EVs, and driverless vehicles, in particular, present a major disruption to the auto industry. Yet when we look at it holistically, the gains for climate are enormous, as are gains in the human experience. These are the kinds of win-win scenarios we should be looking for. They can make life better for most people while also delivering the kind of climate solutions we all need.
When you share this post, you spread the word and help Intertwine grow. Thanks for sharing!
Get my poetry newsletter Soul Food: Poems by Anthony.
Get my newsletter on books called Arguments with Books.
Get Intertwine: Living Better in a Worsening World.
Intertwine is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.