pros and cons of self driving cars essay

Self-Driving Cars Pros And Cons: Navigating The Future Of Transportation

Self-driving cars are a double-edged sword.

Self-driving cars may have seemed like a myth a decade ago. Still, a few manufacturers have already reached Level 3 autonomous driving, which is more than halfway toward the goal of building actual autonomous vehicles. Honda did it first with the Honda Legend Hybrid EX, which is the Japanese version of the Acura TLX .

If you're unfamiliar with the rating system, a globally accepted standard goes up to Level 5, where the driver is no longer required. Car technology is evolving rapidly, especially in the electric segment.

But before we get to that, we must first understand what self-driving cars are.

Why Do They Matter?

Fossil fuels are quickly becoming a thing of the past, and one day the human driver will likely follow. You might think it's a pipe dream, but a whole new generation of people have no interest in car ownership. They see autonomous cars as a huge win because they will be the most efficient transportation. These people want to sit back and be passengers. The current car-buying public can't stomach the idea of self-driving technology taking away what has become one of the ultimate ways of expressing freedom. But those opinions are rapidly dwindling, and their benefits are hard to ignore.

Automated driving systems are the next big step forward, so we need to know both the pros and cons of driverless cars.

Self-Driving Cars

Self-driving vehicles go by many names, but this one has become the most popular because of Tesla, even though the American automaker has been called out many times for using the term without having the technology to live up to the name. Other standard terms are autonomous vehicles, driverless cars, and automated cars.

We prefer automated vehicles as opposed to autonomous vehicles. We make this distinction purely because the autonomous vehicle does not exist yet. Autonomy suggests an artificial intelligence capable of learning and adapting. Automated cars respond to a situation using only man-made programming. This programming can be updated over time, but at the end of the day, a so-called autonomous vehicle (as they're mostly known) can only do what a line of code tells it to do. A prime example is the advanced driver assist feature known as automatic braking.

While it may appear as if the car is self-driving, it's just code. The vehicle goes through a series of yes or no questions within the blink of an eye. Is there a pedestrian in front of the car? Yes. Is the human behind the wheel paying attention? No. Will one or more pedestrians get hurt if the brakes aren't applied right now? Yes. And then it applies the brakes.

Cars with these advanced driving features are Level 2. These systems are responsible for a reduction in car crashes, but the driver still needs to be in charge of the vehicle at all times.

As mentioned, Level 3 is the highest we've gone so far; even so, it's just a higher level of automation. The vehicle can monitor its surroundings and accelerate, brake, steer, and change lanes. In certain areas where the highway code allows, a driver can even remove their hands.

Level 4 is where we reach actual autonomy. This is when the car starts to think for itself, and it can analyze complex situations and work around them. Even so, a Level 4 self-driving car still needs a steering wheel so the driver can take over if the vehicle is flummoxed. Computers can only handle so much. For now, at least.

Up until now, we've been dealing with human-driven cars. Level 5 removes human error entirely. The vehicle doesn't need a steering wheel because it can do everything a human can without human error. When discussing human error , think of distracted driving, road rage, straying over speed limits, and losing control.

Only when automakers reach Level 5 can we rightfully start using terms like driverless, autonomous, and self-driving cars.

Since the technology does not yet exist, and human drivers are still going to be around for a while, the self-driving car's pros and cons we'll be exploring are all theoretical.

Self Driving Cars Pros And Cons

According to the NHTSA, one of the main pros of self-driving cars is safety. It says that more than 90% of traffic accidents are caused by human error , so if you remove us from the formula, there will, theoretically, be a decrease in road accidents and an overall increase in road safety.

Autonomous vehicles will also be more environmentally friendly, and these cars could potentially reduce emissions. How, exactly?

Well, once computers are in charge of transport, connected technology will significantly leap forward. Many automakers have proposed that self-driving vehicles could tap into the systems that regulate traffic.

Basically, a car will know at exactly what speed it needs to move to reduce congestion. Traffic flow will increase, and the fuel savings will be immense, whether a car is powered by fossil fuels or electricity. So, reducing emissions is one big plus for autonomous vehicles.

We're also looking at fewer accidents, most likely in urban areas. Without being connected to information, improved safety in rural areas remains in the air. We must wonder how these cars will handle narrow lanes or roads without clearly painted lines. If you've ever driven on UK roads, you'll be forgiven for thinking autonomous driving is a pipe dream.

The cons of self-driving cars are both clear and not. While they may make the roads safer, we have to mention potential job losses , security issues, and more severe vehicle crashes.

The job losses as a result of the driverless car will be severe. Taxi drivers will lose their jobs because taxi services will buy vehicles that don't need drivers. Cars don't get sick or need a holiday. Delivery services also won't require humans, and Uber drivers can kiss their jobs goodbye. Once self-driving vehicles are upscaled, bus drivers will lose their jobs because the people in charge of public transportation will come to the same conclusion. That's a lot of lost jobs across the world. The future seems bleak for everyone who makes a living from driving.

Autonomous technology also poses a security threat from multiple angles. We're sure automakers will use advanced security to prevent a car from getting hacked. However, as mentioned earlier, these cars are expected to connect to loads of external servers, possibly even other vehicles on the road. This may make them vulnerable .

Cars will also have more computers than ever, putting them at greater risk to hackers. And they'll likely get hold of your credit card information because once you have nothing to do in a car, you'll probably subscribe to some streaming service. We're already seeing the first examples of this coming through for people who are waiting while charging their electric vehicles.

In the pros section, we mentioned a reduction in crashes, but one of the most significant theoretical negatives of self-driving cars is an increase in the severity of impacts. Fewer cars mean less traffic, likely resulting in a higher top speed. If an autonomous car does crash, it will probably lose control at a higher speed. A higher speed means more damage to passengers.

But the biggest con is that all cars would need to be driverless. We can't have a scenario with a 50:50 split or even a case where most vehicles are autonomous. Even if we had just 1% human drivers, human error is still in play.

Self-driving systems can be as evolved as possible, but even they can't accurately predict what a drunk person might do.

Should We Be Afraid Of Driverless Cars?

As an entity, the car is too ingrained in society to be obliterated within 50 years. Driving is also a freedom people won't willingly give up. And looking at the job losses mentioned earlier, self-driving vehicles are pretty scary. Conversely, automated vehicles can improve our lives if manufacturers can get them to function correctly over a long period.

Currently, we can't see a future where driving is wholly eradicated. Therefore, we don't believe Level 5 will ever happen. The experts agree with us on this topic. At best, we'll have Level 4 to handle all the mundane tasks, while a driver can take over when the journey gets more interesting.

February 3, 2018

Are Autonomous Cars Really Safer Than Human Drivers?

Most comparisons between human drivers and automated vehicles have been at best uneven—and at worst unfair

By Peter Hancock & The Conversation US

Getty Images

The following essay is reprinted with permission from  The Conversation , an online publication covering the latest research.

Much of the push toward self-driving cars has been underwritten by the  hope that they will save lives  by getting involved in fewer crashes with  fewer injuries and deaths  than human-driven cars. But so far, most comparisons between human drivers and automated vehicles have been at best uneven, and at worst, unfair.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

The statistics  measuring how many crashes occur  are hard to argue with:  More than 90 percent  of car crashes in the U.S. are thought to involve some form of  driver error . Eliminating this error would,  in two years , save as many people as the country lost in  all of the Vietnam War .

But to me, as a  human factors researcher , that’s not enough information to properly evaluate whether automation may actually be better than humans at not crashing. Their respective crash rates can only be determined by also knowing how many non-collisions happen. For human drivers is it one collision per billion chances to crash, or one in a  trillion ?

Assessing the rate at which things do not happen is extremely difficult. For example, estimating how many times you didn’t bump into someone in the hall today relates to how many people there were in the hallway and how long you were walking there. Also, people forget non-events very quickly, if we even notice them happening. To determine whether automated vehicles are safer than humans, researchers will need to establish a non-collision rate for both humans and these emerging driverless vehicles.

Comparing appropriate statistics

Crash statistics for human-driven cars  are compiled from all sorts of driving situations, and on all types of roads. This includes people driving through pouring rain, on dirt roads and climbing steep slopes in the snow. However, much of the data on self-driving cars’ safety comes  from Western states  of the U.S., often in good weather. Large amounts of the data have been recorded on unidirectional, multi-lane highways, where the most important tasks are staying in the car’s own lane and not getting too close to the vehicle ahead.

Automated cars are  rather good at those kinds of tasks  – but then again, so are humans. The data on fully automated systems will naturally expand to cover more roads as  states allow automated vehicles  to operate more widely. But it will take some time before self-driving cars can cover as many miles in a year and in as many circumstances as human drivers presently do.

It is true that self-driving cars don’t get  tired, angry, frustrated or drunk . But neither can they yet react to uncertain and ambiguous situations with the same skill or anticipation of an attentive human driver, which suggests that perhaps the two still  need to work together . Nor do purely automated vehicles possess the foresight to avoid potential peril: They largely drive from moment to moment, rather than thinking ahead to possible events literally  down the road .

To an automated vision system, a bus shelter full of people  might appear quite similar to an uninhabited corn field . Indeed, deciding what action to take in an emergency is difficult for humans, but drivers have  sacrificed themselves for the greater good of others . An automated system’s  limited understanding of the world  means it  will almost never  evaluate a situation the same way a human would. And machines can’t be specifically programmed in advance to  handle every imaginable set of events .

New tech brings new concerns

Some people may argue that the promise of simply reducing the number of injuries and deaths is enough to justify expanding the use of driverless cars. I do agree that it would be a great thing if tomorrow were the dawn of a new day when a completely driverless roadway killed or injured no one; although such an arrangement might  suck more of the enjoyment  from our everyday lives, especially for those who love driving.

But experience from aviation shows that as new automated systems are introduced, there is  often an increase in the rate of adverse events . Though temporary, this potential  uptick in the crash rate  may cause concern for the general public and then politicians, lawmakers and even manufacturers – who  might be discouraged  from sticking with the new technology.

As a result, comparisons between humans and automated vehicles have to be performed carefully. This is particularly true because human-controlled vehicles are likely to remain on the roads for many years and even decades to come. How will people and driverless cars mix together, and  who will be at fault for any collisions  between them?

To fairly evaluate driverless cars on how well they fulfill their promise of improved safety, it’s important to ensure the data being presented actually provide a true comparison. Choosing to replace humans with automation has more effects than simply a  one-for-one swap . It’s important to make those decisions mindfully.

This article was originally published on  The Conversation . Read the  original article .

A business journal from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania

Knowledge at Wharton Podcast

The good, the bad and the ugly: how to plan for a driverless future, february 27, 2019 • 24 min listen.

Just like 120 years ago when the first cars transformed the U.S., driverless cars will force radical change, too. The results could be positive – or positively terrible -- depending on choices made today.

Engineer Samuel I. Schwartz discusses the profound changes that will come with the shift to autonomous vehicles.

  An edited transcript of the conversation follows.

Weighing the Pros and Cons of Driverless Cars

Knowledge at Wharton: What will the world be like when autonomous vehicles are everywhere?

Samuel I. Schwartz: It will be a revolution in how we move about. It could be good, it could be bad, it could be ugly. It really depends upon the models that we follow going forward. In 90% of the United States, our public transportation is in a sorry state. We could offer a lot more public transportation through autonomous vehicles. That’s one positive kind of outcome.

The negative outcome could be if we just don’t change our behavior. Everybody is traveling by autonomous vehicles, and they take the car to work, tell the car to go home, and then pick them up at the end of the day. You double the amount of miles. Another possible outcome is that people live farther away, and we encourage sprawl and intrude upon what remaining rural areas that we have. We turn them into exurbias. Inactivity could rise a great deal, and that means certain kinds of diseases like diabetes and heart disease and even cancers.

Loads of jobs will disappear. It’s no secret what Uber’s model is. They offer a service that a lot of people are signing up for, and they have been able to subsidize that service with low fares. Ultimately, their plan is to get rid of the most costly part of that, which is the driver. So, Uber drivers will be out of jobs. Taxi drivers out of jobs. Truck drivers out of jobs. Many transit jobs will disappear. This will be nothing short of a revolution in the way we live, not unlike 120 years ago when the car first came on the scene.

Knowledge at Wharton: It sounds like there are a lot of negatives. [of driverless cars]

Schwartz: I’m really worried about the negatives. We’re hyping the fact that there will be fewer traffic deaths, and that’s true. But we could achieve a lot fewer traffic deaths by many of the devices that will be in autonomous vehicles, such as automatic braking, collision-avoidance systems, blind-spot monitoring and lane controls. We could save lives right now. But that seems to be the impetus for autonomous vehicles.

“If we’re stupid, what we will do is just add more and more lanes.”

On the other hand, there’s been an epidemic of obesity in the United States, and that obesity is taking its toll in an increasing rate of people dying from diseases like diabetes, heart disease, cancer and others. Worldwide, more people die from inactivity diseases than from traffic crashes. Too many die from traffic crashes — 1.3 million — but five million from inactivity. Going forward we have to weigh all these things.

Knowledge at Wharton: City and state governments have to do an exorbitant level of planning to be prepared for these changes, correct?

Schwartz:   Exactly, and I’m quite fearful. Whether it’s Philadelphia or New York or San Francisco or Denver, cities are becoming more and more vibrant over the last 20 years. A lot has to do with the millennial populations moving in — people who want to not necessarily rely on an automobile. They want to walk more, bike more, more active transportation. We can undo all that with autonomous vehicles.

The autonomous vehicles will not work well with pedestrians. Nobody has figured out how to determine what a pedestrian will do. A fear that I have is, ultimately, the autonomous vehicles industry, which could be the most powerful industry we’ve ever seen, will dictate, as the automobile dictated 100 years ago when it criminalized what humans had done for hundreds of thousands of years. And that’s walk in any direction they want, whenever they want.

Knowledge at Wharton: Will public transit agencies, such as the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) here in Philadelphia, invest in autonomous vehicles to replace traditional buses?

Schwartz: If SEPTA and other organizations are smart, they would begin the process right now, and they would work with the unions to ensure that jobs are protected. Maybe not jobs as bus drivers but maintaining the systems. One of the problems that we have in just about every public transportation is that we have one or two types of buses, and they tend to be too big for many routes. There are too few people on those routes. Imagine if we can go with micro-transit — small buses that have triple the frequency of the existing buses because you don’t have those additional costs of labor associated with it. But you still have about the same number of people working because they’re now working in the technology portion of the industry.

I think it’s really important for transit not to be left out. There is a movement that says we do not need public transportation anymore with autonomous vehicles because cars could follow each other so closely, and we can call those “road trains.” That’s all hype. They don’t even come close to the capacity of a real good, solid bus service or a train line. But I’m afraid public transportation unions and others may very well fight this. And they’ll be on the losing end, ultimately.

Knowledge at Wharton: Let’s switch to infrastructure. How will roads be impacted in general by more driverless vehicles?

Schwartz: Again, it comes down to, are we going to be smart about it? If we’re smart about it, we can accept the fact that an autonomous vehicle doesn’t veer or sway as much as a driver does. That means we can make very narrow lanes, and these vehicles can remain in those lanes. That means less infrastructure is needed. On the New Jersey Turnpike, those lanes are 12 feet wide. That’s 36 feet. You could probably get three lanes for autonomous cars for 21 feet — three 7-foot lanes. So, you could save on infrastructure and abandon maintaining some of that infrastructure. You could plant on the infrastructure. You don’t need as much parking infrastructure that we have all over the place right now. You could save on that.

If we’re stupid, what we will do is just add more and more lanes. We’ll add more and more capacity to these highways, move more and more vehicles, then dump them onto the streets of Philadelphia or Boston or New York, which can’t accept it as quickly. There’s an opportunity here. Let’s seize that opportunity and have less infrastructure doing a more efficient job.

“You could do everything in your car. You never need to leave it.”

Knowledge at Wharton: How will land use change because of AV?

Schwartz: If you flew over any city today in the United States, what you would see is a huge chunk — maybe 20% or 30% or 40% — dedicated to parking. You’re not going to need parking. You’re going to see sharp reductions. We’re already seeing it with Uber and Lyft and Via and Juno and Gett and others. A lot of the models show that there will be more and more shared vehicles. There will be more and more fleets that are offering services so that people don’t need cars to park. When they’re dropping you off, those cars will go to some other location and not to a parking lot.

This is a revolution in land use. Imagine a city like Atlanta, which has parking lot, building, parking lot, building, parking garage, building. Suddenly, each one of those that separates the buildings could become something else – another building, a residential building, mixed-use. It could become a park. This is probably the greatest release of property that we have ever seen since we acquired the West.

Knowledge at Wharton: That could be troubling for the real estate industry.

Schwartz: It’s going to be turbulent. It’s already being turbulent. It’s already being felt at airports around the country, again with Uber and Lyft. Airports in general make their most money out of parking. Airport after airport is reporting a diminution in the number of people parking and in the revenue for parking. It’s now into the double-digit reductions, so it’s getting to be pretty serious.

We’re going to see the same thing with people who own parking lots and garages all around the country, in cities mainly. It hasn’t hit rural areas. It hasn’t hit suburban areas as much. But ultimately, it will.

Knowledge at Wharton: But if we’re going to take parking lots in the middle of urban areas and turn them into mixed-use or residential, we’re going to need to add infrastructure — sewage and water and electric — for all those buildings. I don’t think we have the current zoning laws to allow the double population density. How does that factor into what you’ve saying?

Schwartz: That’s what cities have to start thinking about. A lot of these will end up being fallow properties or bankrupt properties. Obviously, you don’t want something like that. If developers are going to see an opportunity there, they should be paying for the infrastructure, as a lot of local governments already require.

This is a radical change. It could affect density in two ways: it fills in and creates higher density in certain urban areas, which allows perhaps more walking and biking, and other forms of efficient transportation; or it could change our land use patterns in which people live much, much farther out because driving is no longer a hassle. Spending an hour and a half in a car could be a very productive. You’ll be able to sleep in your car. You’ll be able to work in your car. You’ll be able to have a romantic dinner in your car. You could do everything in your car. You never need to leave it.

Knowledge at Wharton: Is this the death knell for the taxi industry?

Schwartz: The taxi industry should seize the moment, should look at the Uber model. The taxi industry as we know it, with a driver behind the wheel, is just not going to be able to compete in the same numbers that they always have. They’re already suffering. There’s been a drop, for example, in the value of a taxi medallion in New York City from well over $1 million to between $200,000 and $300,000. And that’s even if you can get somebody to finance that, which nobody seems to be able to do.

It could be a death knell for the taxi industry as we know it. It could be that a new industry called robo-taxis could arise from that. Maybe people could transfer their medallions into the robo-taxis, so they get first rights over taxi services with automated vehicles.

Knowledge at Wharton: You talked about the implications for pedestrians. How does that apply to drivers who still choose to drive themselves? Will they face the same regulations and restrictions?

Schwartz:   Great question. We’re going to have conventional cars on the road with autonomous vehicles. It’s not unlike 100 years ago, when we had horses and the automobile on the roads, and it was a particularly chaotic period. It was the most deadly period on America’s roads. Right now, the federal government is saying it will never outlaw driving. I believe by the second half of this century, that will happen in countries other than the United States. I don’t think it will happen here. But I don’t think it’s going to change any of the rules regarding pedestrians for the conventional driver.

“Think of the autonomous vehicle as just being a computer on wheels. Think of how many times your computer does something that it wasn’t supposed to do.”

There may be rules that are set for the autonomous vehicle having to have certain devices, the ability to communicate directly with pedestrians. The autonomous vehicle industry would love to put the burden totally on the pedestrians because they can’t figure it out. Some researchers have come up with devices that pedestrians would have to wear. My fear is that the autonomous vehicle industry will insist upon sensors on sidewalks with cattle chutes where pedestrians are allowed to cross. Sounds outrageous, but outrageous things have happened in the past.

For conventional drivers, I see no changes in the immediate future. For the long-term future, this is a problem that needs to be tackled in a smart way, and I’m always afraid we’ll take the other choice.

Knowledge at Wharton: Can you outline how the auto industry will change, including the repair industry?

Schwartz: One of the models coming forward is that the auto industry no longer predominantly sells automobiles but sells rides. For that to happen, it means that there will be far more fleets. It’ll be kind of like the Uber of today, except without a driver that will show up. There will be these fleets that could be maintained at central locations. Therefore, all these gas stations, all these mechanics, dealerships may very well be out of jobs because all of it could be centralized at just a handful of locations operated by whatever the automobile/AV industry creates.

So, there is a great fear. If we go the other way and there is individual ownership of cars, which is one possible scenario, then we’ll still see some kind of maintenance. But it may become more difficult to insure your autonomous vehicle than it will be for a fleet to insure an autonomous vehicle. That’s because of the technology that needs to be very well maintained, and I’m not sure individuals will have the patience to regularly do that.

Think of the autonomous vehicle as just being a computer on wheels. Think of how many times your computer does something that it wasn’t supposed to do. You have to reboot it. Well, those things are going to happen. Multiply that by 300 million people who will have computers on wheels, how many times you have to call somebody to service it because it’s going a little bit haywire, or the number of times that it’s hacked. You do need really good maintenance of these computers on these vehicles, and it’s not clear that individuals will have as much capability as fleets will. That’s why we may lean towards fleet maintenance.

Knowledge at Wharton: Wouldn’t delivery services like FedEx or UPS or Uber Eats benefit greatly from this?

Schwartz: Yes. The probable early uses of autonomous vehicles are for the long-haul trucking. Trucking that’s going coast to coast right now requires a driver, requires that driver to get rest. That vehicle can drive without stopping. It may have to stop for some fueling, but it doesn’t have to stop to eat, it doesn’t have to stop to sleep. It may need a driver to meet it at a certain destination, but for 3,000 miles, it could drive by itself. That’ll be one of the first uses that we see.

More From Knowledge at Wharton

Why Do So Many EV Startups Fail?

Five Myths About Generative AI That Leaders Should Know

From Amazon to Uber: Why Platform Accountability Requires a Holistic Approach

Looking for more insights.

Sign up to stay informed about our latest article releases.

20 Pros and Cons of Driverless Cars

Believe it or not, driverless cars are not a recent invention despite the push to incorporate this technology into the modern vehicle. The concept was first introduced in the Futurama exhibit at the 1939 World’s Fair in New York City. General Motors offered a display that reflected what they though their vision of the world would be in the next two decades. It included an automated highway system which would guide driverless vehicles to their destination.

General Motors would eventually build a working vehicle in 1958 after providing an electric model that was guided by radio-controlled electromagnetic fields for their ’39 exhibit.

This idea was improved upon about 20 years later when Japanese automakers realized that they could use camera systems to relay data to an onboard computer that would process images of the road and create responses. This vehicle had a maximum speed of 20mph, which didn’t make it very practical. As the industry worked on this issue, German manufacturers came up with a system that could safely drive at 56mph.

Although we do not have robotic vehicles or driverless cars filling our roadways as of yet, the modern car does contain numerous autonomous features that make driving easier and safer than ever before. Some models offer assisted parking or braking systems that activate automatically if they sense an issue. Vehicles can sense lane position and make adjustments there as well.

List of the Pros of Driverless Cars

1. This technology would likely reduce the number of accidents that occur on roadways. When we are riding along in a driverless car, then what happens on the road is no longer subject to the numerous bad behaviors that human drivers exhibit as they attempt to reach their destination. Over 80% of automobile crashes are as a result of human error. If computers are in more control, then there could be fewer road rage incidents, insurance costs that are associated with damage, and several other benefits that could potentially help to reduce overall driving times.

2. It would help individuals with disabilities to have more independence. Although vehicles can receive modifications that make it possible for some people with disabilities to have movement independence, driverless cars would make this possible for many more people. That means there could be less dependence on the public transportation systems that can sometimes offer unpredictable schedules. There would be less of a need to rely on others to get around, which means more people would have additional mobility without requiring significant lifestyle changes to make it happen.

3. Driverless cars could work with higher speed limits. As human populations move toward the use of driverless cars, it may become possible to raise the speed limit that vehicles can drive on extended trips. The computers would calculate the operations of the automobile to ensure the occupants remain safe. That means passengers could take care of other needs while the vehicle does the work of transportation without compromising the safety of the people who are on the roadways.

4. It could reduce the amount of fuel that we consume for transportation needs. Computers would make it possible for driverless cars to maximize the fuel economy of every trip in multiple ways. Platooning would allow for the vehicles to draft with one another to reduce the effort that the engines would need to work while on the road. Real-time updates to driving conditions could help automobiles avoid high-traffic areas, places where weather disruptions are possible, and other potential hazards in the road. Because these vehicles would likely communicate with each other while on the roadway, they could ensure that everyone reaps these rewards of this advantage while still providing a higher level of safety.

5. Driverless vehicles could reduce commute times. Because a driverless car would likely communicate with the other vehicles around it and the roadway, it would know where to maximize speed and movement to ensure the quickest possible commute. Other automobiles would react when a vehicle needed to exist a highway, for example, preventing the need to force oneself into lanes, cutoff drivers, or miss an exit. Vehicles could travel in bumper-to-bumper platoons while automatically merging to accommodate oncoming traffic.

Although this benefit would eventually be limited by the available infrastructure in each city, this option would make it a lot easier for workers to commute every day.

6. It would help people become independent even though they hate driving. There are plenty of people out there who find driving to be an enjoyable exercise, even if there is the occasional person who cuts them off or creates the potential for an accident. The time spent in a vehicle is not always an enjoyable experience. Even people who don’t like the idea of driving could spend the time in the vehicle watching television, shopping online, or catching up on some work. You could hop into your car, place an order for groceries that you could pick up, and then have them ready by the time you reached your destination.

7. Self-driving cars could reduce the number of automobile thefts. We are already using biometric technologies that can recognize fingerprints and faces to use as our passwords for our devices. This technology could also apply to self-driving cars that only respond when programmed passengers enter the vehicle. These automobiles are self-aware on some level thanks to this potential advantage, which means it would refuse to start or immediate shut down if someone else tried to use it. Alarm systems could even alert law enforcement automatically when an individual would try to remove parts from the vehicle.

Owl cameras help to provide a level of security that could be incorporated into future driverless technologies already. It features dual HD AI smart cameras that access and send video through a 4G LTE connection. You have a 14-day encrypted video history that stores images based on movement detected in the vehicle. You can access information in real-time as well through your smartphone with views from anywhere, with alerts to crashes, dents, and break-ins.

8. It would allow drivers to continue traveling despite distractions or fatigue. Even if our driverless cars become more of a hybrid system than something that is 100% automated, we could still use this technology to support a reduction in distracted or fatigued driving incidents. Drivers who are intoxicated could still use their vehicles to make it home because it would be the computer driving instead of the human with the reduced perception window and reaction time. If you got tired during a trip, you could place the vehicle into an automated mode and catch a quick nap without stopping.

Because this technology wouldn’t forget about driving rules, miss a stop sign in a new community, or weave in and out of traffic like an intoxicated driver would, the potential for fewer accidents is significantly reduced by taking advantage of this option.

List of the Cons of Driverless Cars

1. The human factor may never be completely eliminated from driving. Even if you owned and operated a self-driving car that could provide you with every advantage listed here, you would still need to know how to operate the vehicle in emergency situations. All drivers would likely need to go through an education course to learn how the technology works, how to use it to their advantage, and what it would take to disengage the self-driving mode. You would also be required to maintain the vehicle properly (oil changes, tire rotation, etc.) to ensure that it remains safe to use.

2. It places the decisions in the hands of the computer. There are times when split-second decisions are necessary because of rapidly changing circumstances. What would a driverless car decide to do if it encountered an individual crossing the street? Would it run into that person or decide to take the vehicle off-road, placing the occupants at a higher risk for harm? There are times in our society where we are more comfortable with a human behind the wheel because we have an instinct to find a third alternative that artificial intelligence does not necessary use. Until we can program this feature into computers, the future of this technology will always be in question.

3. There are security issues to consider with driverless cars. We already have computers operating numerous facets of the driving experience today that are susceptible to hacking. People can access specific control mechanisms in some makes and models to the extent that the driver loses control over their automobile. This disadvantage would rise to a new level with driverless cars. There would need to be new levels of security installed as a firewall around the vehicle to ensure it would not be used in an inappropriate manner.

Although we could program computers to stop potentially violent actions, such as a vehicle attack, there would be a risk that terrorists could program a driverless car to engage in such actions without the permission of the owner too.

4. Self-driving cars would collect a lot of personal information. If you were to use a self-driving car, then the computer would store information about your trip. It could keep records about your destinations, such as the stores you prefer to visit, the restaurants you like, or even how much you’re willing to spend on snacks. This data would be a treasure trove of info that marketers would want to use to create individualized advertising. Unless there are privacy protections in place that would prevent automobile manufacturers from selling this data to third parties, this technology could further erode what few protections are already available.

5. There are no legal precedents about accident responsibility with driverless cars. Although a driverless car system would likely reduce the number of accidents that occur on roadways, they will not completely remove this threat from our transportation grids. In 2018, Uber experienced the first known fatality involving a self-driving vehicle in Tempe, AZ, when their car struck a pedestrian. The driver is looking down at her lap when the accident occurs, with the vehicle stopping at the moment of impact.

An evaluation of the system showed that the driverless car detected the pedestrian just 0.9 seconds before impact, giving it 50 feet to stop. The car didn’t slow or swerve, impacting the person at 38 mph. This incident grounded the fleet of driverless vehicles until the issue can come to a suitable resolution.

6. Current technologies may prohibit safe use in challenging weather conditions. There are times when human drivers would still be required to navigate roads that are in poor condition. Snowy roadways where chains are required may not provide enough visual resources for the sensors on the vehicles to operate properly. When there are heavy rains occurring, then serious problems with the laser sensors mounted on the vehicle can occur. That means humans would be responsible for navigating through potentially severe issues, which means there must still be a skill taught for driving even if we fully adapt to this technology.

7. Driverless cars cannot interpret human traffic signals with current technologies. Our current use of driverless cars operates using a system of cameras, radar, and lidar sensors. This technology makes it possible for the computers of the vehicle to “see” the environment around them, detect traffic, or stop when it encounters an obstacle. There are times when emergency situations require law enforcement, utility workers, firefighters, or other first responders to direct traffic using hand signals. If a driverless car were to encounter such a situation, then it wouldn’t know what to do.

8. We must have access to accurate mapping systems for this technology to be successful. The success that we currently experience with driverless technologies relies on updated GPS systems and mapping that can direct the car to where it is supposed to go. We have all heard stories about how drivers followed instructions from this equipment to turn the wrong way on a one-way street or go into an area where a roadway doesn’t exist.

In 2012, students from Tokyo who were visiting Australia were following the instructions provided by their GPS and drove themselves right into Moreton Bay as they tried to navigate between two islands along a channel route. A 17-year-old driver in New Jersey made an illegal left turn following the advice of the GPS, leading to a four-car accident. These issues could become more prevalent if we rely on the automated functions of a driverless car.

9. It may create a net loss of jobs in society. As driverless cars approach the market as a legitimate option, there is a similar threat faced in society for employment that is similar to what artificial intelligence causes in other industries. It is very possible that this technology could slowly put the people who operate transport vehicles for a living out of business. Anyone who drives a tax, delivers food, or even works for Uber could be impacted in negative ways. Driverless trucks could even transport goods across the country without needing someone behind the wheel to guarantee the delivery.

10. The cost of driverless cars is still prohibitive for the average person. Driverless cars use technologies that cost an average of $100,000 per vehicle as of 2018. Although that price has come down in recent years, that is still a cost which is outside of the realm of ownership possibilities for the average family. We are still several years away from having an auto manufacturing incorporate these options in ways that can help us to be completely hands-free as a society. Until then, we will need to settle for the autonomous features that automakers are slowly infusing into the driving experience for all of us.

11. It wouldn’t stop traffic jams. You are still going to have plenty of vehicles on roadways when using driverless technologies. Highways are only capable of handling a certain amount of traffic. You will still encounter stop-and-go driving conditions in major metropolitan areas even with this option simply because of the number of people who are traveling.

12. Rural communities would likely be the last to receive this benefit. Like most new technologies that get implemented in the world today, it would be the wealthiest and most populous regions of the world that would receive driverless options first. This process would create a series of hybrid driving scenarios where some vehicles would operate automatically, and others would still provide the traditional user experience. It could take several years for a full implementation in the developed world, while developing countries would likely be decades away from being able to experience the benefits of this technology.

The pros and cons of driverless vehicles show us that we still have a lot of room to grow with this technology, even as it slowly begins to approach its 100th birthday as a practical idea. New advances in the field of artificial technology provide us with hope that it could become a reality one day. There are also questions about ethics and responsibility to consider when employing this technology on a larger scale than what we have already tried.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Cars are getting better at driving themselves, but you still can't sit back and nap

Camila Domonoske

A Waymo minivan moves along a city street during an autonomous vehicle ride on April 7 in Chandler, Ariz. Waymo, a unit of Google parent Alphabet Inc., is one of several companies testing driverless vehicles in the U.S. Automakers are also developing self-driving technology, but it still requires human drivers to take over when required. Ross D. Franklin/AP hide caption

A Waymo minivan moves along a city street during an autonomous vehicle ride on April 7 in Chandler, Ariz. Waymo, a unit of Google parent Alphabet Inc., is one of several companies testing driverless vehicles in the U.S. Automakers are also developing self-driving technology, but it still requires human drivers to take over when required.

If you're taking a lot of road trips this holiday season, maybe you've wished your car could just drive itself to Grandma's house.

The auto industry has been working on autonomous driving for years. And companies like Waymo and Cruise are testing fully autonomous driving — in some cities, you can already hop in a driverless taxi.

But if you want a genuinely self-driving car of your own, you're out of luck.

Yes, vehicles are getting better at controlling their own steering and acceleration in more situations.

But despite all the fancy names being used by automakers, the technology is still nowhere near the point where the car can handle all the driving while you nap — a distinction drivers must keep in mind.

"There are exactly zero self-driving cars available for purchase, anywhere in the world today, from any manufacturer," says Sam Abuelsamid, principal analyst at Guidehouse Insights.

Why Safer Cars Don't Lead To Cheaper Car Insurance ... Yet

A Safety Feature By Any Other Name Can Really Be Confusing, AAA Finds

Hands off the wheel, but eyes on the road.

Take General Motors' Super Cruise. It's one of a slew of confusingly named "advanced driver-assistance systems" that allow cars to control their own steering and/or acceleration.

And it's one of just a few systems that allow a driver to actually — safely — remove their hands from the wheel on the road. For now, the feature is only available on some highways ; it relies on a combination of GPS, high-precision maps, cameras and radar.

When it's working, the vehicle can automatically control its speed and steering without the driver having to touch a pedal or the steering wheel. That might seem pretty close to the dream of a car that can do the driving for you.

But the technology doesn't work 100% of the time — and it doesn't pretend to.

When a vehicle with Super Cruise encounters a situation it finds confusing, like a construction zone or a stretch of highway where its map is missing data, it will hand control back to the driver.

The car signals that it needs assistance by flashing red lights on the steering wheel, and on some vehicles, through vibrations in the driver's seat.

And if something unexpected happens on the roadway, the driver is supposed to be ready to seize control in an instant.

A Domino's Pizza self-driving delivery vehicle, shown in Houston on July 22, is one example in which businesses of all stripes, from food delivery restaurants to trucking, are eyeing driverless technology. Brandon Bell/Getty Images hide caption

A Domino's Pizza self-driving delivery vehicle, shown in Houston on July 22, is one example in which businesses of all stripes, from food delivery restaurants to trucking, are eyeing driverless technology.

Because the car needs help some of the time, the driver has to pay attention all of the time.

"The human is always responsible for driving, even when you're hands-free," says Ron Arnesen, executive chief engineer for automated driving and active safety programs at GM.

GM doesn't assume people will do the responsible thing and pay attention.

There's a camera embedded in the steering column that tracks the driver's eyes — even behind sunglasses — to make sure they stay on the road. Should the driver's gaze wander, the vehicle makes progressively more alarmed buzzes, flashes and alarms, and eventually refuses to drive itself any more.

It's an essential safety feature, Arnesen says, because GM knows that Super Cruise will not be able to handle all road situations.

"If you're always paying attention," he says, "you can take over within a matter of a split second if you need to."

Even "Full Self-Driving" requires human oversight

Tesla, more than any other automaker, has heavily marketed the idea of a car that can genuinely drive itself.

Its "Autopilot" driver-assistance technology is a major selling point for the vehicles.

And a small number of drivers are now getting to test the long-promised "Full Self-Driving" software, which allows a Tesla to steer itself on ordinary city roads — handling turns, waiting at stoplights and responding appropriately to the sometimes-unpredictable behavior of other vehicles and pedestrians.

Hypothetically.

For now, Tesla's technology still requires a human to have their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road, despite being called "full self-driving."

"I like to keep my foot, like, hovering in between the gas and the brakes," says Victoria Scruggs, a Tesla owner who is part of the beta test. "You really don't know what it's going to do sometimes."

In a recent test drive with Scruggs, her Model 3 drove perfectly reasonably through some intersections. At others, it hesitated, or moved with strange jerkiness, or shut off mid-route and put Scruggs back in charge.

Scruggs says a previous version of the software swerved so aggressively into the wrong lane that it actually hurt her wrist.

In general, she says, her Tesla can drive itself very well on highways. It can do OK going straight on city streets, she adds.

"But when you throw turns into the mix, it's a little bit iffy," she says.

So, You Are Shopping For A Car At A Terrible Time. Here's What To Keep In Mind

As Auto Industry Goes Electric, Can It Avoid A Battery Bottleneck?

On city streets, the software makes driving more stressful, not less, she says. And as a Tesla beta tester, she uses it not to make her life easier, but to collect more data to help the company make the software better.

Tesla's marketing and rollout of this technology is controversial.

Tesla's more limited Autopilot technology, which only handles simple driving tasks and is less erratic, has been involved in deadly crashes , and multiple incidents in which it didn't seem to recognize emergency vehicles .

Safety advocates have expressed concern that Tesla drivers may be relying too heavily on Autopilot, assuming the technology will function better than it will.

They've also criticized "Autopilot" and "Full Self-Driving" as dangerously misleading names, and have raised concerns about Tesla testing experimental software on public roads.

Tesla, which has been criticized for exaggerating the capabilities of its software, did include a pretty blunt warning for drivers testing the "full self-driving" features. It cautions that it could do "the wrong thing at the worst time."

The better cars get, the harder they are to supervise

While no personal vehicles are 100% self-driving, the amount of driving these systems can handle on their own is impressive, compared to what was available on the market just a few years ago.

And it's not just pricey, cutting-edge Cadillacs and Teslas that have seen significant progress in this area.

Kelly Funkhouser, who runs automated vehicle testing for Consumer Reports , says car shoppers might be surprised to learn just how many new cars can do some driving for you.

More than 50% of new vehicle models can control speed and/or steering in highway driving situations, she says – even if they can't navigate for you from start to finish, handle highway lane changes or allow you to (hypothetically) paint your nails on the freeway.

High-tech driver assistance features do make driving — especially long highway hauls — much easier. They certainly make it more pleasant. And in some cases, like when cars automatically hit the brakes to avoid an accident, they can have clear safety benefits.

Baidu Apollo Robotaxis move on a street in Beijing on May 2. Chinese tech giant Baidu rolled out its paid driverless taxi service, making it the first company that commercialized autonomous driving operations in China. Andy Wong/AP hide caption

Baidu Apollo Robotaxis move on a street in Beijing on May 2. Chinese tech giant Baidu rolled out its paid driverless taxi service, making it the first company that commercialized autonomous driving operations in China.

Still, these vehicles all require close human oversight to work safely.

And the smarter our cars get, the more challenging that becomes. Funkhouser says these driver assistance functions make driving "even more boring," and that worries her.

"It's human nature, really, to just kind of want to zone out and find something exciting to do other than watch the car drive," Funkhouser says. "It's just like watching paint dry, right?"

"That's what worries us most about these systems," she says. "As they become more competent, then it's easier for drivers to kind of want to check out and find something else to do."

In other words, you still need to keep your eyes on the road for that long drive to Grandma's house — no matter how boring it gets.

Correction Dec. 27, 2021

A previous version of this story misspelled Ron Arnesen's last name as Arneson.

• self driving

32 Major Pros & Cons Of Self-Driving Cars

“ My opinion is it’s a bridge too far to go to fully autonomous cars.”

Elon Musk, Businessman

Advantages & Disadvantages of Self-Driving Cars

Self-driving cars (also often referred to as autonomous cars) have great potential to become the main transportation method in the near future.

Even though there are several benefits related to the use of self-driving vehicles, there are also some issues related to this technology.

In this article, the pros and cons of self-driving cars are examined.

Please enable JavaScript

Audio Lesson

Advantages of self-driving cars, machines don’t get tired, robots make fewer mistakes, systems do not have emotions, no risk of drunk driving, robots are able to constantly focus, self-driving cars follow traffic rules, robots have higher attention spans, improvements in mobility for people who can’t drive, more convenient driving experience, potential lower insurance costs, may be faster on average, makes working while driving possible, savings on fuel, improvements in air quality, reduction in car thefts, reduction of fatalities due to driver mistakes, economic advantages.

An important advantage of self-driving cars is that unlike humans, machines do not get tired.

Many accidents are caused each year due to the fact that drivers fall asleep while driving their cars.

Thus, by using autonomous cars, drivers could actually fall asleep without causing any trouble since the machine would navigate through the traffic and the number of accidents could be greatly reduced.

In general, robots also make far fewer mistakes compared to humans.

We as humans have so many different things running through our minds that we are not always able to fully concentrate on driving.

This often leads to mistakes and accidents.

Through the use of self-driving cars, those accidents could be prevented since machines will not be distracted and will make fewer or even almost no mistakes at all.

Many accidents and other issues related to our traffic are often due to the fact that people lose control over their emotions.

People might become angry due to a driving maneuver of another driver and might seek revenge for that.

In contrast, self-driving machines would not become angry at all and would stay rational and safe instead, which could potentially save many lives that would otherwise be lost through traffic accidents.

Many accidents on our roads also happen since people are driving drunk or under the influence of drugs.

Many people simply underestimate the risk of substance intoxication in conjunction with driving or even do not care at all.

Through the use of self-driving cars, this issue can be mitigated since the car will carry out all tasks and navigate through traffic.

We as humans get distracted by all kinds of things of our daily life.

We may even look at our phones while driving from time to time.

All those distractions increase the likelihood of serious accidents.

However, in contrast to humans, robots are not vulnerable to those kinds of distractions at all.

They simply do what they are programmed to do and chances for accidents are much smaller due to the fact that robots are able to constantly focus on what is happening on the streets.

Self-driving cars will also follow traffic rules.

They would strictly comply with the speed limits and would do everything that traffic safety is ensured.

In contrast, humans often drive faster than the traffic rules would allow them and also sometimes jump a red light, which may in turn lead to an increased chance for traffic accidents.

Also, the attention spans of robots are much higher compared to humans.

Since we have a huge information overload in all areas of our daily lives, studies found that humans have a lower attention span than goldfishes.

This low attention span can be extremely dangerous when driving cars since accidents will become much more likely.

Self-driving cars are perfect to solve this issue since their attention span is almost infinite and they will likely not become distracted at all.

Especially for people who can’t actually drive, self-driving cars could be a great alternative.

Imagine a pensioner who will no longer be able to drive a car in a safe manner due to health issues or other problems.

For this person, using an autonomous car would be a great way to stay independent since this car could bring the pensioner to the next grocery store whenever he wanted to go there.

Thus, self-driving cars also increase the mobility level of people who would have issues to get around otherwise.

Self-driving cars can also provide a pretty convenient driving experience.

Especially in big cities, commuting to work can be quite exhausting due to traffic jams.

Navigating through the city traffic can stress your nerves and may be quite annoying over time.

By using a self-driving car instead, you could simply sit back and relax since your car will be able to navigate through the traffic.

You could even read a book or do something else you like to do instead of focusing on the traffic.

Insurance companies might also reward you for getting a self-driving car since the chances for accidents may be lower and therefore, your insurance premium may become lower as well.

Thus, even though self-driving cars may be more expensive compared to conventional cars, you could save plenty of money on your car insurance in the long run.

Self-driving cars may also be faster than human drivers when it comes to getting to a certain destination.

Self-driving vehicles process plenty of information every second.

They are able to constantly update the fastest route and may be better able to change directions once they detect traffic jams or other issues compared to humans.

Once the technology behind autonomous vehicles becomes mature, people may even be able to work while commuting.

Imagine you have a stressful job and have to finalize a presentation pretty soon.

You could use the time in your car for working on your presentation with your laptop while your car would safely navigate through the traffic.

Wouldn’t that be great?!

Since self-driving cars are much better to anticipate changes in traffic conditions and therefore could navigate more smoothly, the use of autonomous vehicles may also lead to a decrease in fuel consumption.

Over time, this could save you large amounts of money, which you could use to go even greener at home or also in all other parts of your daily life.

Through a reduction in fuel consumption, also the air quality in big cities could be significantly improved.

Thus, lower fuel consumption due to the use of autonomous vehicles does not only save you plenty of money, it could also improve your ecological footprint.

Since self-driving cars are usually equipped with quite advanced technology , thieves may refrain from stealing these cars since they fear to get caught pretty soon.

Moreover, these cars may also have additional safety features so they might be almost impossible to steal anyway.

Thus, by buying an autonomous car, also the risk of car thefts would be lowered.

Driving mistakes are the biggest source of deadly car accidents.

Humans are not perfect and make mistakes on a frequent basis. Using autonomous cars may greatly mitigate this issue since machines will make almost no mistakes at all.

Thus, using self-driving cars could greatly reduce the number of fatalities due to car accidents each year.

There are also economic advantages related to the use of self-driving cars.

Since the number of car accidents could be significantly reduced, also government spending for the police and ambulance could be significantly lowered.

In turn, this would save plenty of taxpayer money.

Disadvantages of Self-Driving Cars

Higher unemployment rate since fewer cab drivers are needed, people may unlearn how to drive manually, higher congestion levels, high r&d costs, high initial purchase price, maintenance may be difficult and costly, privacy concerns, fun of driving may decrease, moral concerns, technical errors, hacking issues, bad weather may prevent technical systems to work properly, people may not be willing to accept this technology, high regulatory restrictions, insurance issues.

Although there are several important advantages to self-driving cars, there are also some problems.

For instance, the use of autonomous cars may lead to higher unemployment in the transportation sector since many cab drivers are no longer needed anymore.

Thus, for this group of people, self-driving cars can be regarded to be rather negative than positive.

Another issue is that many people will no longer be able to drive manually.

As long as the autonomous vehicle is working properly, this is not a big issue.

However, once the self-driving system suffers from any issues, it might be important to be able to navigate the car manually in a safe manner.

Thus, even if the use of self-driving cars becomes the industry standard, we should still make sure that people have a minimum skill in manual driving in order to solve issues in case the autonomous system fails.

Since self-driving cars are quite convenient, the introduction of this technology might lead to higher congestion levels since the number of cars might increase.

For instance, people who have no driver’s license may just buy an autonomous car.

Thus, if the number of cars on our streets increase, self-driving cars may also imply a negative effect on our environment since more greenhouse gases will be emitted into our atmosphere.

Even though the technology behind autonomous vehicles is quite promising, plenty of money has still to be invested in order to make it safe enough for mass transportation.

Until this kind of technology is mature enough, hundreds of billions of dollars have to be spent and plenty of research has to be done.

It could take one more decade until we will be able to transit to autonomous cars on a large scale.

Especially in the beginning, autonomous cars will be quite expensive.

Industry experts estimate that a self-driving car could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

However, this is true for most technologies. In the beginning, they are quite expensive.

Once time goes by and technology improves, the price may drop significantly.

Thus, even though self-driving cars would not be affordable for most people at the beginning, over time, they would likely be affordable for most middle-class families.

Since the technology behind autonomous vehicles is not mature yet, so is the knowledge of most mechanics.

Many car repair shops may not be able to fix issues of self-driving cars in a proper manner and owners of those cars may have a hard time finding someone who is experienced enough in this field to fix his car.

Thus, the maintenance of autonomous cars might be quite difficult and also costly.

Since plenty of data is needed in order to make autonomous driving possible, critics of autonomous cars often have serious privacy concerns regarding this technology.

For instance, the general public would not be able to track where their data is stored and for what other purposes it might be used.

Thus, autonomous car companies have to make sure that personal data is properly protected and not misused in order to keep the trust of the general public.

Many people also enjoy driving their cars very much.

For them, driving their car is their hobby and those people might not be happy with an autonomous car.

Thus, for some people, autonomous cars may not be suitable since they might lose part of the fun regarding the driving experience.

Autonomous driving is also often criticized due to ethical concerns.

For instance, in case of emergency, an autonomous car has to decide whether it wants to take action A or B.

Let’s assume action A is hitting another car and action B will result in an injury for the driver due to a sidestep.

If there are no other options, the car has to decide whether it wants to save the driver or the other car.

Many people claim that this cannot be justified from an ethical standpoint that we let machines decide when it comes to saving or taking the lives of people.

Even though machines usually do not make too many mistakes, there had been accidents with self-driving cars in the past.

This is also due to the fact that the technology behind self-driving cars is not mature yet.

Over time, the probability of accidents related to self-driving cars will decrease.

Thus, even though technical errors are possible, they are still far less likely than mistakes that are made by humans.

Another danger of self-driving vehicles are issues related to hacking.

If hackers are able to attack the systems that are needed for self-driving cars to work properly, this could lead to a variety of serious accidents.

Therefore, car companies have to make sure that the underlying data systems are protected properly in order to fight hacking attacks and to assure the safety of autonomous cars.

The sensors of autonomous cars are also vulnerable to bad weather conditions.

For instance, if there is heavy rain or a snowstorm, it is hard for autonomous cars to navigate properly since the sensors might not work in a reliable manner.

Thus, researchers also have to solve this issue before autonomous cars can be used by the general public on a large scale.

Many people are still quite critical in their attitude towards autonomous cars.

This is quite logical since people often do not want to lose control over things.

For instance, flying is considered to be much safer than driving a car.

However, many people feel more scared in planes compared to cars.

Thus, car companies might have a hard time convincing people that it might be a good idea to use a self-driving car instead of a conventional one.

Another issue related to autonomous driving is that there might be quite strict regulations in this field.

Any mistake could cost lives, thus, regulators will likely be quite strict regarding the approval of self-driving cars on our streets.

Therefore, car companies might have a hard time convincing regulators regarding the safety of autonomous cars.

There might also be some issues related to the insurance of autonomous cars.

In case of accidents, there might be plenty of discussions about the question of fault.

Thus, courts will likely be quite busy once autonomous cars will be approved on a large scale.

Top 10 Self-Driving Car Pros & Cons – Summary List

Even though self-driving cars have many important advantages, there are also some problems related to autonomous driving.

Plenty of money and time has to be invested in additional research until the technology behind self-driving cars will be mature enough to approve them on our streets on a large scale.

However, once this technology becomes sophisticated enough, it will be a serious alternative to the use of conventional cars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-driving_car

https://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonomous-vehicles.aspx

https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/j.ctt5hhwgz.11?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

About the author

My name is Andreas and my mission is to educate people of all ages about our environmental problems and how everyone can make a contribution to mitigate these issues.

As I went to university and got my Master’s degree in Economics, I did plenty of research in the field of Development Economics.

After finishing university, I traveled around the world. From this time on, I wanted to make a contribution to ensure a livable future for the next generations in every part of our beautiful planet.

Wanna make a contribution to save our environment? Share it!

Terms & Privacy Policy

Affiliate Disclosure

As an associate, I may earn commissions from qualifying purchases from Amazon or other programs.

Please note that all the information I provide on this website is to my best knowledge. However, I will not take any responsibility for incorrect information and will not be liable for any negative consequences that might occur due to the reliance on this information.

Pin It on Pinterest

The pros and cons of the self-driving car revolution

Examining what it would mean to let AI take the wheel

• Newsletter sign up Newsletter

According to a new survey by AAA, close to 70 percent of Americans are afraid of fully self-driving cars, Axios reports. This number is up from previous years. The increase, according to the findings, is largely due to the public misunderstanding of self-driving technology and "recent headline-grabbing incidents" regarding self and assisted-driving technology. As technology becomes more advanced, here is a look at both sides of the debate on whether self-driving is the future:

Con: Machines are not as smart as humans

Self-driving systems "simply lack humans' ability to predict and assess risk quickly," explained Nick Carey and Paul Lienert for Reuters . The discrepancy would be even higher in "edge cases," or unpredictable systems. The development of automatic vehicles has proven to be more difficult than expected because "the brain makes judgments and assesses probabilities," and "every aspect of that thought process (conscious or unconscious) must be programmed to ensure safety," according to the Texas A&M Transportation Institute .

"We have lots of empirical evidence that humans are incredibly good at intuiting the intentions of others," Sam Anthony wrote for Quartz . "The perils of lacking an intuition for state of mind are already evident," in self-driving technology, Anthony continued. For now, fully self-driving cars are not possible. Some AV start-ups have implemented " human supervisors " who sit "tens of hundreds of miles away monitoring video feeds from multiple AVs."

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Pro: Self-driving cars could make our roads safer

Despite concerns over whether self-driving vehicles could match up to human drivers, a study found that 94 percent of serious crashes in 2017 were due to human error, explained Bernard Marr for Forbes . "Fully autonomous vehicles would take human error out of the equation, thereby making our roads safer not just for drivers, but also passengers, cyclists, and pedestrians," he argues.

Self-driving vehicles have "superior senses" compared to human drivers allowing them to "navigate conditions that would be tricky for humans, such as driving through a fog bank or navigating a pitch black highway," wrote Caitlin Delohery for Utah Business . Given time, automatic vehicles have the potential to become safer than human drivers.

Con: They could cause privacy and security concerns

"A real cyberattack against autonomous vehicles is very much in the realm of possibility," wrote Ines Kagubare for The Hill . If a hacker figures out the system being used by a potential car, they "can now target those cars on the road," said Shane Tews, a nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise to The Hill . It could allow vehicles to become "instruments of terror."

Aside from the mechanics of the car privacy could also be a concern because "AVs will record everything that happens in and around them," argued The Economist . Self-driving taxis can contain large amounts of information about passengers which "could open the door to segregation and discrimination" and "restrict people's movements."

Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox

A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com

Pro: They could mark the end of parking problems

The widespread adoption of self-driving cars could lead to an "efficient use of space," especially in congested urban areas, per Charles Choi in IEEE Spectrum . Autonomous vehicle lots "would not require elevators and staircases" and people ... could simply be dropped off ... and let the vehicles park themselves." In turn, "That land could be allocated to other activities — residential space, perhaps, or maybe green areas for everyone," said Sina Bahrami , a transportation engineer at the University of Toronto.

People would likely own fewer cars, opting to "make use of automated ride-sharing or taxi services," argued Marr for Forbes . As a result, there will be "fewer people needing to find a parking space" and "the buildings of the future may no longer be flanked by huge, ugly car parks."

Con: They could cause job losses

The shift to autonomous vehicles could be "costly for some people, especially workers in legacy industries," according to Carolyn Fortuna of CleanTechnica . While there is a lot to gain in a growing new industry, some historic jobs may prove to become obsolete. Investopedia explained how "people who earn their living from driving these vehicles will suddenly find themselves out of a job" and how it would likely "be difficult ... to quickly find new work."

A study published in 2021 found that people "believe governments are not prepared for the transformations AVs will force upon workplace arenas." Fortuna wrote, "Efforts to design new jobs created by AVs should take advantage of the skills that people in the disrupted occupations already have."

Pro: They could be more environmentally friendly

In the future, self-driving vehicles could possibly help to reduce emissions because they "use significantly less gas and energy when driving, compared to a vehicle driven by a human" explained Ashleigh Rose-Harman in Greener Ideal . Also, most of the autonomous vehicles being developed and driven currently "are already fully electric" making them less damaging than their gas counterparts. The development could also lead to people purchasing fewer cars and avoiding "unnecessary overlapping trips that contribute to emissions."

However, the benefit is contingent on whether companies could improve the efficiency of the computing technology at a "significantly faster pace," Soumya Sudhakar, a researcher at MIT, told The Washington Post . "If we get ahead of it, we could design more efficient autonomous vehicles that have a smaller carbon footprint from the start."

 Devika Rao has worked as a staff writer at The Week since 2022, covering science, the environment, climate and business. She previously worked as a policy associate for a nonprofit organization advocating for environmental action from a business perspective.  

Cartoons Artists take on checklists, ice creams, and more

By The Week US Published 19 May 24

The Week Recommends This Spanish spot has fantastic restaurants "rooted in the region's distinctive produce"

By The Week UK Published 19 May 24

The Week's daily crossword

By The Week Staff Published 19 May 24

The explainer AI is very much mostly not green technology

By Devika Rao, The Week US Published 21 March 24

Under the Radar New technologies can trace copper, lithium and nickel with 'less environmental degradation' and cut West's reliance on China

By The Week UK Published 7 February 24

Talking Point Artificial intelligence is a double-edged sword in this crisis

By Devika Rao Published 24 July 23

Speed Read Will developing nations slow the peak of global oil demand?

By Devika Rao Published 14 July 23

Speed Read Air conditioners have been bad for the planet, but we'll likely continue to need them.

By Devika Rao Published 5 July 23

Talking Point Is Google's acceptance of climate misinformation intentional?

By Devika Rao Published 23 May 23

The Explainer From mind-reading health benefits to speaking to animals and deceased loved ones

By The Week Staff Last updated 19 October 23

By Brigid Kennedy Published 6 April 22

• Contact Future's experts
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Advertise With Us

The Week is part of Future plc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site . © Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street, New York, NY 10036.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• AI and Human Enhancement: Americans’ Openness Is Tempered by a Range of Concerns
• 4. Americans cautious about the deployment of driverless cars

Table of Contents

• 1. How Americans think about artificial intelligence
• 2. Public more likely to see facial recognition use by police as good, rather than bad for society
• 3. Mixed views about social media companies using algorithms to find false information
• 5. What Americans think about possibilities ahead for human enhancement
• 6. Public cautious about enhancing cognitive function using computer chip implants in the brain
• 7. Americans are closely divided over editing a baby’s genes to reduce serious health risk
• 8. Mixed views about a future with widespread use of robotic exoskeletons to increase strength for manual labor jobs
• Acknowledgments
• Methodology

Driverless cars may evoke images from sci-fi films to Saturday morning cartoons, but the prospect is hardly remote now. While Americans today cannot purchase a fully autonomous vehicle, there are some cars that already operate with minimal human assistance and others that are expected to be able to run without human drivers in the future. Several companies like Google’s parent company Alphabet and Amazon have been piloting these vehicles in cities around the U.S. for years.

These advancements have the potential to create both new opportunities and less desirable outcomes. Proponents say driverless vehicles could reduce the stress of commuting, lower the number of accidents and make traveling more sustainable. But critics have raised a number of concerns – ranging from safety risks , to cost , to their potential to hurt the environment by making car travel easier .

This technology has also generated pressing questions related to work, human agency and ethics: How will this impact people who drive for a living? Are Americans willing to give up control to a machine? And whose safety should be prioritized in a potential life-or-death situation?

When posed these questions – and more – the survey reveals that larger shares of U.S. adults think the widespread use of driverless passenger vehicles is a bad idea for society than think it is a good idea (44% vs. 26%). Additionally, 29% say they are not sure if this would be a good or bad idea for society.

A majority of Americans are also wary about riding in an autonomous vehicle. Roughly six-in-ten adults (63%) say they would not want to ride in a driverless passenger vehicle if they had the opportunity, while a much smaller share (37%) say they would want to do this.

Interest in riding in a driverless vehicle varies across demographic groups, with age being one of the most notable differences. Adults under the age of 50 are about twice as likely as those 50 and older to say they would ride in this type of car (47% vs. 25%).

There are also differences by gender and educational attainment. Some 46% of men say they would want to ride in a driverless car, compared with 27% of women. Additionally, men under the age of 50 stand out for their desire to ride in an autonomous vehicle: 59% of this group say they would want to do this, while those shares drop to about one-third or less among women under 50 and both men and women 50 and older. And those with a bachelor’s or advanced degree are more likely than those with less formal education to say they would ride in an autonomous vehicle. For example, roughly half of those with a postgraduate degree say they would like to ride in one of these cars, compared with three-in-ten of those who have completed high school or less.

Most adults have heard or read at least a little about driverless cars (88%), including 26% who say they have heard or read a lot. Only 12% of adults say they have heard nothing at all about driverless cars. And those who have heard more about driverless cars are also more likely to want to ride in them. Some 54% of those who have heard a lot say they want to ride in driverless cars, compared with 32% of those who have heard a little and about one-in-five who have heard nothing at all.

Many Americans are not only reluctant to ride in driverless cars, some are also concerned about sharing the road with one. In total, 45% of Americans say they would not feel comfortable sharing the road with driverless vehicles if use of them became widespread, including 18% who would not feel comfortable at all. Smaller shares indicate they would be extremely (7%) or very (14%) comfortable sharing the road with autonomous vehicles.

As was true with wanting to ride in a driverless vehicle, men are more likely than women to say they would be extremely or very comfortable sharing the road with these types of cars (27% vs. 15%). Conversely, 54% of women say they would be uncomfortable with this compared with 35% of men. There are also gaps by age, with adults under 50 being more comfortable with sharing the road with driverless cars than those 50 and older. And those with a bachelor’s degree or more are more likely than those with less formal education to say the same.

A 2017 Pew Research Center survey also measured the public’s views about riding in or sharing the road with autonomous vehicles. While figures are not directly comparable across these two surveys due to changes in question wording, there are clear patterns that emerge in both. Then, as now, a majority of Americans were not interested in riding in a driverless vehicle, and many were wary of sharing the road with vehicles. And those who are more open to this technology continue to skew younger, male or college-educated.

Those who have heard a lot about driverless cars more likely than those who have heard nothing to think they are a good idea

Many of the groups who are more likely to say they would ride in a driverless vehicle are also more likely to say these cars are a good idea for society. For example, adults ages 18 to 49 are more likely than those 50 and older to say driverless cars are a good idea (33% vs. 19%). Men and those with more formal education are also more likely to perceive these cars as a good idea for society.

Those who have heard a lot about driverless cars (45%) are about twice as likely as those who have heard a little (22%) to say they’re a good idea, and about four times as likely as those who have heard nothing at all (11%) to say the same.

Relatedly, those who think driverless cars are a good idea on a societal level are also more likely to want to ride in one themselves. Most adults who say driverless cars are a good idea for society say they would want to ride in one (86%), while most who see these vehicles as a bad idea say they would not want to ride in one (89%).

Public foresees a mix of both positive and negative outcomes if driverless cars become widely used

Americans were asked about several possible outcomes that may occur if driverless cars become widely used, and the findings show the public thinks there could be both pros and cons.

When it comes to possible positive outcomes, 72% say that older adults and people with disabilities would definitely or probably be able to live more independently with widespread use of driverless cars, while 56% say getting from place to place would definitely or probably be less stressful. Still, about four-in-ten do not think autonomous vehicles would alleviate the stress of going places.

On the more negative side, clear majorities say that the widespread use of driverless cars would definitely or probably lead to many people who make a living by driving others or delivering things with passenger vehicles losing their jobs (83%) or that computer systems in the vehicles would be easily hacked in ways that put safety at risk (76%).

Those who generally think driverless cars would be a good idea for society are more likely than those who think they would be a bad idea to say positive outcomes would occur with widespread use. Roughly half of adults who think these vehicles are a good idea say older adults and people with disabilities would definitely be able to live more independently, compared with 8% of those who say driverless cars would be a bad idea. Similarly, only 14% of those who think driverless cars are a good idea say the computer systems would definitely be easily hacked, compared with 37% of those who think these cars are a bad idea.

When asked about the potential impact that the widespread use of driverless passenger vehicles could have on income inequality, 46% say these vehicles would increase the gap between higher- and lower-income Americans, while much smaller shares (8%) expect the economic gaps to decrease. Still, 46% think these disparities would not change if the use of autonomous vehicles became widespread.

Mixed views on whether driverless vehicles would increase or decrease traffic deaths, injuries

A central question about the deployment of autonomous passenger vehicles is whether these cars would help reduce traffic accidents or instead lead to more injuries or fatalities. This survey finds that 39% of Americans say the widespread use of driverless vehicles would decrease the number of people killed or injured in traffic accidents, and 27% believe traffic deaths and injuries would increase . Another 31% say it would not make much difference.

A 2017 Center survey also found mixed views on whether driverless cars would reduce traffic injuries or deaths. The current figures cannot be directly compared to the previous survey due to changes in question wording, but it does highlight that even with advancements and investments in driverless vehicle technology, the public remains divided on the impact these cars will have on traffic safety.

About four-in-ten are unsure if driverless car systems should prioritize safety of passengers or those outside vehicle if an accident is unavoidable

One of the most well-documented debates regarding driverless cars centers on the “trolley problem.” It is the ethical dilemma of whether a trolley driver who is on a collision course with pedestrians should take action and switch tracks to save several people, even if it results in killing just one person, or if the driver should do nothing in order to spare the life of the single pedestrian, thereby dooming several others.

Software developers, industry leaders and safety experts must grapple with the modern version of this question of whose safety should be the priority in the event of a coming accident involving an autonomous vehicle. This is a question that some experts themselves are unsure of how to answer, while others critique the usefulness of this framing altogether.

In this survey, larger shares say that in the case of an unavoidable accident, the computer system guiding the driverless car should prioritize the safety of the vehicle’s passengers, rather than those outside of the vehicle (40% vs. 18%). But some are also uncertain of what these systems should be programmed to do: 41% report being unsure whose safety should be prioritized in the case of an unavoidable accident.

Who should have a role in setting driverless passenger vehicle standards, and to what degree?

The U.S. Department of Transportation has been mapping safety standards and plans for introducing autonomous vehicles onto the nation’s roadways . Accordingly, this survey explored people’s views about the scope of those regulations and which groups should be involved in setting the standards.

There is strong agreement among Americans that the standards used to test the safety of regular vehicles are inadequate when it comes to driverless ones. A clear majority of Americans (87%) say driverless vehicles should be tested using a higher standard than is used for regular vehicles. Only 11% believe that existing standards used for regular vehicles would be enough to ensure the safety and effectiveness of autonomous vehicles.

In addition to understanding the types of standards people want to see, Americans were also asked to weigh in on the level of involvement they would like to see certain groups play when it comes to setting these standards for how driverless vehicles are used.

Some 91% of Americans say the companies that develop driverless passenger vehicles should play a role in setting standards for how these vehicles are used. And 62% say they should play a major role.

Similar shares say the individuals who use these driverless vehicles and the federal government should have a major role in this process (54% and 53%, respectively). There are some differences by party when it comes to how much of a role the federal government should have in setting standards: 66% of Democrats and those who lean toward the Democratic Party say it should have a major role, compared with 38% of Republicans and Republican leaners who say the same. And 20% of Republicans say the federal government should have no role at all.

Meanwhile, the public is less enthused about having car dealerships that sell driverless passenger vehicles playing a major role in setting standards – with 36% saying they should have no role at all.

When asked to share their views about the level of regulation that may be in store for autonomous vehicles, 55% say their greater concern is that the government will not go far enough in regulating the use of driverless passenger vehicles, while a smaller share (43%) says the government will go too far.

Roughly seven-in-ten Democrats (69%) say their greater concern is that the government will not go far enough in regulating the use of driverless vehicles in the event it becomes widespread. Republicans’ views tilt in the opposite direction: 59% say they are more concerned that government will go too far in regulating these cars.

A majority of Americans say some ideas would make the use of driverless vehicles more acceptable

While a large share of the public is wary of riding in or sharing the road with autonomous vehicles, people say there are steps that could be taken to make the use of driverless cars more acceptable to them.

About seven-in-ten Americans say driverless passenger vehicles would be more acceptable if regular reports about the number of accidents caused by them were required (71%), if autonomous cars were labeled as driverless in order to be easily identified (70%) and if such cars were required to travel in dedicated lanes (67%). Some 57% say use of driverless cars would be more acceptable if someone in the vehicle was required to have a driver’s license. Still, a third of Americans say someone having a license would make no difference in how they view driverless cars.

Mixed views on deploying driverless technology in some other kinds of vehicles; opinions on using this software in 18-wheelers are negative

Driverless technology systems can be employed for a variety of purposes. And Americans have reservations about automating other kinds of transit – especially 18-wheeler trucks. Roughly six-in-ten (59%) say they oppose the use of technology used to operate driverless passenger vehicles in these trucks, with just 20% in favor of this.

Sentiment regarding using these technologies in other modes of transportation is somewhat more divided. While 43% say they oppose the use of driverless technology in public buses, 34% are in favor of this. And when it comes to views about driverless delivery vehicles or taxis and ride-sharing vehicles, about four-in-ten each are in favor of using the technology for this purpose. Still, about one-third are opposed to this.

Across each of the types of vehicles measured in this survey, there is some level of uncertainty about how they feel about the technology. For example, 25% of Americans are unsure if the technology used in driverless passenger vehicles should be used in taxis and ride-sharing vehicles.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Artificial Intelligence
• Emerging Technology
• Gene Editing
• Human Enhancement
• Misinformation
• Misinformation Online
• Online Privacy & Security
• Political Issues
• Privacy Rights
• Social Media
• Social Media & the News
• Tech Companies
• Technology Policy Issues

5 key themes in Americans’ views about AI and human enhancement

What is machine learning, and how does it work, the longer and more often people use facebook, the more ad preferences the site lists about them, how does a computer ‘see’ gender, 7 things we’ve learned about computer algorithms, most popular, report materials.

• American Trends Panel Wave 99

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

We are searching for --

Please wait. This should take only a few seconds.

Sorry! We could not find the results.

This VIN is corresponding to more than one vehicle

Please choose the vehicle you want values for from the list below:

What Are Self Driving Cars and How Do They Work?

In this post

What are self-driving cars, the six levels of driving automation, how do self-driving cars work, who invented self-driving cars, are self-driving cars safe, pros and cons of self-driving cars, pros of self driving cars, cons of self driving cars.

I’ve heard one phrase many times during long, monotonous highway drives: “ How did people do this before cruise control? ” Allowing your vehicle to regulate its speed automatically lets you relax and give your mind a break.

Take this concept, multiply it several times over, and you arrive at self-driving cars.

The idea of resting in your seat while the car does all the work is quite appealing. However, many people are reluctant to give up control. There are legitimate downsides to self-driving cars, but many fears stem from a lack of knowledge of the technology.

Hopefully, this post helps you understand this emerging sector more deeply and decide whether you want to trust yourself in this new class of vehicles.

Self-driving cars are exactly what they sound like. They are cars that detect the surrounding environment and make handling decisions without the driver’s help.

Functions like speed control, steering, braking, lane shifting, and even headlight activation are managed in real-time through the vehicle’s computer.

However, most self-driving cars do not operate 100 percent independently. They require commands from passengers or a control service to get started and know where to go. There are also varying degrees of automation where some features are left to the vehicle and others to the driver.

The Society of Automotive Engineers ( SAE ) outlines six levels of driving automation from level 0 to level 5.

There’s a wide disparity in features within the first three levels (0-2), but they all refer to setups requiring the driver’s attention. These levels may include some automated services, but these are tools to assist you, such as lane centering and  adaptive cruise control . You are still driving.

The last three levels (3-5) are probably more in line with what you picture when thinking about self-driving cars. These vehicles are making all the road decisions on their own. You may be able to override the programs and take over, but the goal is a hands-off experience.

Self-driving cars are equipped with a series of sensors that create a real-time map of their surroundings. They’re trained to recognize and read road features such as lane positions, streetlights, road signs, nearby vehicles, and pedestrians.

However, recognizing what’s around us is only half the battle. The most crucial part is knowing how close or far away that car is in the next lane. Autonomous vehicles emit light pulses that bounce off the surroundings and measure their exact distance from them.

All this information is fed into complex algorithms managed by the electronic control unit (ECU) to determine the most suitable response.

Now that we’ve covered how these cars “see” and respond to the world, let’s go over how they know where to go. The passenger designates a destination through a map service, primarily through Google Maps.

The vehicle then performs “path planning” to determine the most expedient and safest route. Depending on the available data, an autonomous car will consider how difficult it will be to change lanes, pass vehicles, or check for roadblocks on the way.

The idea of a fully autonomous vehicle has been around for decades. It was dreamt up in early science fiction, but the first individual to create a road-ready version was  Ernst Dickmanns  and his team in the EUREKA PROMETHEUS project.

Throughout the 80s and 90s, Dickmanns re-engineered an S-Class Mercedes-Benz into the first autonomous vehicle. The vehicle had a public drive in 1984 but only passed through uncluttered roads.

Its first real test came in 1994 when it drove 620 miles through heavy traffic on Parisian highways. This demonstration showed a vehicle’s potential to maintain safe distances, perform lane changes, and pass other drivers utilizing cameras.

While the EUREKA PROMETHEUS project was underway in Europe, the Pentagon was doing its own research alongside Carnegie Mellon University. Their research introduced early forms of Lidar distance measuring.

In 1995, the US Department of Defense funded the Navlab 1’s journey from Pittsburgh to San Diego. The drive was nearly 3000 miles long, and the Navlab 1 controlled steering for over 98 percent of the journey.

The excitement (and government funding) surrounding autonomous vehicle development drew teams from several universities. The  DARPA Grand Challenge  pitted teams against each other in a race from California to Nevada.

No team reached the finish line in the first year. However, five teams completed the route only one year later. This fervor for automated vehicle research spurred many more developments and culminated in the Tesla and Waymo of today.

Losing control over a multi-ton hunk of metal is a scary thought. There’s relatable anxiety around potential malfunctions or the underlying software’s reliability. People see hectic highways and clogged intersections and doubt the vehicle’s ability to navigate safely.

Forbes reported that 93 percent of Americans felt that self-driving cars were unsafe. However, it also reported that 81 percent of Americans had never ridden in such a vehicle.

We won’t say there aren’t cases of accidents and injury from self-driving cars. Cruise, a subsidiary of General Motors, recalled nearly 1000 of its cars after one of them dragged a pedestrian for twenty feet in an attempt to avoid crashing.

This case raised commonly cited problems with automated vehicles, machine learning, and artificial intelligence in general. Driverless cars are not capable of human ethics and follow a strict code. Cruise’s vehicle did not determine that it would be better to hit another vehicle rather than drag the pedestrian.

One of the biggest red flags was Tesla’s massive vehicle recall after the NHTSA reported many autopilot-caused accidents. The event was alarming because Tesla models composed the majority of self-driving cars on American roads.

Despite recent events, there are places where autonomous vehicles are already reporting fantastic safety metrics. Waymo, famous for its self-driving taxi services, reported that its driverless cars were 6.7 times less likely to crash than human-controlled vehicles.

The most significant distinction between Waymo and Tesla is that the former’s cars operate in limited areas. Their taxi services have access to copious data regarding road conditions, traffic, and even pedestrian density at certain times of day. The city's Waymo works to even connect the streetlights to Waymo vehicles for further safety.

Autonomous vehicles promise to transform our roads by offering new levels of efficiency and safety. However, while the potential benefits are substantial, there are also serious concerns and drawbacks to consider. 

One of the benefits of a self-driving system is that the sensors don’t get tired. Their eyes don’t slowly close on dark drives, stray to their phone screen, or miss a stop sign. In terms of reliability, these sensors and programs cause significantly fewer problems than what arises from human error.

These cars may also help people with mobility issues, such as the disabled or elderly, get around. These people often rely on family members or live-in care for transportation. Self-driving cars would help them get out of the house on their own.

In the ride service industry, consumers may feel safer in driverless vehicles than in traditional ones. They aren’t putting themselves in the hands of a stranger or worrying about their mental state. Best of all, there’s no risk of getting roped into a conversation.

There are undeniable problems in autonomous vehicles that must be addressed. One of the most prominent topics is these vehicles’ lack of human ethics and morals. In an emergency, an autonomous car may make a choice based on its training that increases damage to humans.

A less conceptual downside of self-driving cars is the loss of jobs in the ride-sharing industry. Every unmanned vehicle takes away a job. While the job may create other positions for programmers or risk assessment officers, the number of driver job openings will decrease. This shift disproportionately affects more unskilled workers.

The weather is yet another obstacle to the broad adoption of self-driving cars. The technology’s reliance on laser and camera sensors means road markings and signs can be hidden by snow or a curtain of rain.

The problem is the same for more rugged areas of the US. Many rural roads don’t have painted lines separating lanes or have one road for driving in both directions. Manufacturers rigorously test on private tracks, but the simulations typically expect a minimum road quality.

Self-driving cars have the potential to change our roads as we know them. The technology has a high potential to increase safety, convenience, and accessibility for countless people. However, it hasn’t reached the level of sophistication necessary to earn widespread trust.

The American people are hesitant to adopt autonomous vehicles despite the many benefits. Recent events like the Tesla recall make putting their loved ones in the backseat hard for many.

Despite this mistrust, driverless cars have succeeded in taxi services like Waymo. The difference is that these vehicles are restricted to cityscapes with ample data to learn from rather than back-alley roads or unknown suburbia.

Ultimately, the constant vigilance and reaction speeds of self-driving cars outpace the capabilities of human drivers. R&D is going strong, and we’re likely to see a massive spike in these vehicles on our roads within the next decade.

Related Articles

Everything About Engine Sludge and Sludge Removal

Honda vs. Toyota: Which One is Better and Why?

Main Causes Of Outside Tire Wear

Recent articles.

What Are The Top Exotic Cars of All Time?

What Happens If You Put Diesel in a Gas Car

How To Disconnect a Car Battery?

Free vehicle search.

• Problem Checks
• Title Records
• LICENSE PLATE

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

President Biden

Tariffs on china aren’t the way to win the ev arms race – getting serious on evs is.

News came out on Friday that President Biden is set to quadruple tariffs on Chinese EVs to protect the US auto industry from the rapid growth of Chinese EV manufacturing.

But instead of just de facto banning the competition from giving Americans access to affordable hot new EVs, the US should instead try making affordable hot new EVs itself .

The global auto industry is in a time of flux.

Cars are changing quickly, as is car manufacturing. The leaders of today, and of the last half-century, are not guaranteed to remain the leaders in the face of new entrants and new technology. And most of all, a new powertrain – electric – that will account for roughly 100% of cars on the road within a couple decades, which no serious person disputes.

Further, as one of the most polluting sectors globally and the most polluting in rich countries , it is necessary that transportation clean up its act, and fast, in order to avoid the worst effects of climate change. The sooner this happens, the easier it will be for all of us.

The new entrants to car manufacturing aren’t just in the form of startups like Tesla or Rivian, but in the form of nations which previously did not have a large presence in international auto manufacturing, but will take advantage of this flux to become more competitive in a changing global market.

The largest of these new entrants is the second most populous country in the world, the world’s largest exporter and its second-largest economy: China. China has heretofore not been a major player in car exports, but that’s changing.

China has been spending the last couple decades building up its manufacturing base, particularly in electronics, and particularly focusing on securing raw material supplies and partnerships and on building up refining capacity.

The strongest move in this respect has been Xi Jinping’s centerpiece Belt and Road Initiative , a set of policies intended to secure trade routes and mineral partnerships between China and less-developed, mineral-rich countries, generally in exchange for infrastructure development. It’s not unlike the actions of the West via the IMF and the World Bank, investing in development of poorer countries in order to secure material partnerships.

All of these entities have been credibly accused of exploitative actions towards the developing world – generally utilizing terms like economic imperialism, debt-trap diplomacy, or neocolonialism.

But the point of this is that China has been getting ready for this transition for a long time through concerted national effort, whereas the US is only recently doing so (via the Inflation Reduction Act and its attempts to onshore/”friend-shore” EV manufacturing and sourcing).

Japan and the 1970s as parable

We have, in fact, seen this story before. In the 1970s, the US auto industry was rocked by dual crises, a gas price crisis that left their large, gas-guzzling vehicles less competitive, and a steel crisis which greatly affected US steel manufacturers.

The steel crisis came courtesy of Japan, a country whose manufacturing methods far outstripped America’s, and which was determined to undercut American steel. It could produce steel cheaper and better than the US, and the low prices that Japan was offering were simply unbeatable by American manufacturers. As a result, many American steelworkers lost their jobs.

Here’s an article about the steel crisis from 2021 from the Alliance for American Manufacturing, which makes parallels to today’s situation between the US and China. In it, former steelworkers are quoted about what happened at the time:

The cost was cheaper, and their quality was better, too. We didn’t care about quality because we were the only game in town forever. -Ed Cook, former president USW Local 3069

The U.S. steelmakers and, as time wore on, the automakers, were being outperformed by Japan and their superior technology advancements. Our employers didn’t invest in new technology until recognizing the concept of foreign competition was here to stay. -Doug May, retired steelworker

The US tried to stop the bleeding with tariffs after accusing Japan of illegally “dumping” steel at unfairly subsidized below-market rates to gain export market share. But the tariffs didn’t stop the advancement of the technologically-superior Japanese steel industry, which remained strong even after their imposition.

The early-70s steel crisis was soon joined by the mid-to-late-70s oil crisis, where the US (and much of the Western world) saw oil shortages and high gas prices. At the time, American automakers mostly produced giant gas guzzlers, and Japanese automakers exploited this crisis by rapidly introducing smaller, more fuel efficient cars to America, just as the environmental movement was starting to gain steam and emissions regulations were starting to take effect.

Automakers responded by undergoing half-baked attempts to meet the standards while still trying to sell their gas guzzlers, by lobbying governments not to implement regulations, and begging for tariffs against competing Japanese autos. Not by actually rising to the challenge and making better vehicles, but rather by asking for the rules to be changed so they could get a free win by doing nothing new.

Eventually, Japan agreed to voluntary export restrictions and US automakers managed to get in gear and start making better cars. But as a result of this disruption in the 1970s , Japan is still considered one of the premier manufacturing industries in the world (automotive and otherwise), and has held the crown of the largest auto-exporting country on the globe for decades.

Between preparation, determination, and opportunity, Japan was able to gain a lasting lead.

Does any of this sound familiar?

China is the new Japan

Well, Japan was the world’s largest auto exporter… until now. It depends on how you count it, but Japan was likely dethroned by China as the world’s largest car exporter in the past year .

All of China’s effort to build EV manufacturing bore fruit – while the country was initially slow to adopt EVs, in 2023 it had a whopping 37% EV market share (up from 5% in 2020 and .84% in 2015), leapfrogging several early adopter nations. But EV manufacturing has grown even faster, with Chinese EV production outpacing domestic demand and exports rising rapidly in recent years as well.

Why did this happen? It turns out, Japanese industry is acting similarly to US industry at the moment, in that it is dragging its feet on electric vehicles (in fact, even moreso than US manufacturers are). European manufacturers, too, are trying to slow the transition down . Automakers are even cutting production plans in a rapidly growing EV market, possibly in a cynical move to influence regulations , even though it’s clear their targets are too low already .

While Biden has pushed for stronger emissions standards, automakers seem determined to lobby against progress, to give themselves a false sense of security that they can take their sweet time in transitioning to EVs.

But regardless of how much automakers kick and scream about needing to build something other than massive gas guzzling land yachts, technology and world industry will continue their inexorable advancement. The industry can catch up, or it can continue dragging its feet and moving slower than its competition, somehow hoping to catch up from the losing position it’s already in.

None of this kicking and screaming is happening in China.

As mentioned above, Chinese government has focused heavily on securing materials and on encouraging upstart EV makers (with a total of either $29 billion or $173 billion in subsidies from 2009-2022, depending on whose numbers you accept, either of which are less than the hundreds of billions in subsidy allocated by the US in the Inflation Reduction Act, or the $7 trillion global subsidy for fossil fuels ). Although, Chinese EV subsidies have waned in recent years .

And Chinese EV makers aren’t playing a silly game of limiting their own commitments in order to push a myth of falling sales (that said, Chinese dealer associations were granted a mere 6-month pause in regulations responding to a glut of unsellable gas cars – while also demanding that automakers stop building noncompliant vehicles immediately). Instead, they’re building cars as fast as they can, selling them as fast as they can, and exporting them in as many ships as they can get their hands on – to the point where they’re even building ships of their own .

This has led to accusations that China is “dumping” EVs on overseas markets, with Europe – which also subsidizes its own EV industry –  considering retroactive tariffs . The US is also set to announce a 4x increase in existing tariffs against Chinese EVs. The irony is, if Chinese taxpayers are subsidizing manufacturing before sending those cars overseas, that represents a wealth transfer from Chinese taxpayers to American ones. And another irony: China has so often been criticized for not doing enough on climate change, and now we’re criticizing them of doing too much , both with EVs and solar .

This all sounds quite similar to the situation with Japan in the 70s.

But just as with Japan, simply blocking out better options won’t kick the West’s industry into gear. On the contrary, it will make our industry more complacent. And we’re already seeing that happening, as automakers keep begging governments to let them continue their unsustainable business models even as competition looms .

Do tariffs work?

But that’s just the thing, tariffs don’t generally work. We saw how they failed to forestall Japan, but there are many other examples showing their ineffectiveness or weird side effects , and economists generally agree that they are a poor measure to help domestic industry. Some company leadership favors the idea of tariffs , while other ( perhaps more sober ) leaders do not .

On the one hand, it could help domestic auto jobs, because free trade for Chinese EVs could result in a race to the bottom for auto manufacturing. And it could result in Chinese companies trying to set up manufacturing in the US to avoid tariffs – which could help US auto jobs, but these moves would likely spark a whole new round of controversy when announced.

But on the other hand, China is likely to implement retaliatory tariffs which will hurt US workers (for example, soybean tariffs which ruined the US soybean industry in 2018 – and resulted in more soybean demand from Brazil, which led to extensive clearcutting and fires in the Amazon ). And the nature of today’s globalized economy and complex supplier relationships around the world can result in a lot of chaos when a major player implements a major tariff.

So in the end, US jobs likely won’t benefit overall , and US consumers will simply be denied a chance to buy cheap new EVs from China – like, for example, the excellent Volvo EX30 . The EX30 is currently made in Geely’s China factory and starts at around $35k even after the 25% tariff.

A 100% tariff would bring it to a starting price of ~$54k instead (unless or until Geely moves production out of China , something BYD has also considered ). The EX30 also happens to be one of the only small EVs that will be available in the US in the near term, so a tariff would further doom US consumers to the plague of SUVs that has befallen us .

By raising prices of vehicles that could undercut US autos, what this means is that inflation – the price of goods for US consumers, which includes autos – will increase. Cars will be more expensive as US manufacturers will have less competition, less reason to bring costs down, and less reason to offer reasonably-sized models. We’ll be stuck with the expensive land yachts that US automakers have been punting at us for so many years. People will continue to accuse EVs of being too expensive – as a result of policy that directly makes them so.

Meanwhile, one of Biden’s signature legislative wins, the Inflation Reduction Act, does include a different type of protectionist provision that seems to have accomplished its goals. It offers tax credits to EV purchasers, as long as those EVs include domestically-sourced components and are assembled in North America. This lowers the effective price of EVs, helping buyers, and stimulates investment in US manufacturing as well.

As a result of this and Biden’s previous Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, $209 billion has been invested in new or expanded factory projects, which will create 241,000 EV jobs in America. So it’s not impossible to incentivize domestic production – but smart industrial policy and subsidies will generally work better than unnecessary trade wars.

The politics factor

Of course there is a large short-term factor to this decision: the US election, which is just a few months out.

In this election, President Biden is running against a candidate who has no issue being loudly racist, and channels that racism into protectionist trade measures. The US’ current 25% tariff against China was implemented by him in 2018 , and a centerpiece of his policy promises revolve around extending these short-sighted measures .

This trade policy is not made out of a consideration of what will be best for the auto industry or the US, but rather is a populist way to seize on Sinophobia, scapegoating the US’ main geopolitical competitor for various social ills happening domestically.

But that sort of sentiment is popular. US sentiment towards China is at record lows , making it a popular target for scapegoating. The sharp turn downwards in recent years is likely influenced by the loud scapegoating from Mr Trump, though it has affected voters across the party identification spectrum.

So Biden’s decision to increase tariffs on Chinese EVs may end up being popular, regardless of its positive or negative effects – after all, Trump’s previous round hurt the US economy, but was still popular .

Protectionism is, after all, historically popular with industrial unions. Biden has secured support from the UAW, a group that has been racking up a lot of impressive wins lately, and wants to expand union power further (for which it has the support of the President ). UAW has asked for higher tariffs , and Biden has taken their advice before.

But it is also good to remember that this election is indeed important. While President Biden’s tariff policy mirrors that of Mr. Trump, Biden’s overall environmental policy does stand out as head and shoulders above the destructive , ill-considered nonsense we saw from the EPA under fossil fuel advocates Scott Pruitt and Andrew Wheeler .

On EVs specifically, Mr. Trump has already begged for $1 billion in bribes from oil companies (soon after scrambling to make bond in his half-billion-dollar fraud case), promising that if they give him these bribes, he would try again to kill electric vehicles (which he failed at last time ) – in a move that would actually benefit the Chinese auto industry , and would harm US consumers’ health and pocketbooks .

So while this EV tariff increase doesn’t seem like a great idea, the alternative is, somehow, much worse. Isn’t that just the story of US politics in a nutshell.

But will the tariff change minds? While tariffs are popular, Trump has associated himself so closely with protectionist trade policy that voters with a thirst for protectionism seem more likely to vote for the candidate that has done more to shout his bombastic racist ideas from the rooftops.

It does seem that, with anti-Chinese sentiment at an all time high, any mention of China short-circuits a certain percentage of the electorate. Despite the demonstrably positive effect that Biden’s EV policy has produced in terms of investment in US EV manufacturing, that very same policy is often ignorantly criticized for helping China – which it does not do. Just have a look in the comments below, we’re sure a number of people who did not get this far into the article will echo exactly this incorrect sentiment.

But that’s a hard thing to explain, which has taken me thousands of words already (sorry) to merely scratch the surface of. The simplicity of “China bad” is a lot more comforting and simple to accept, despite lacking nuance.

How do we beat China? Not by tariffs, but by trying harder

Apologies for taking so long to get around to the point, but I hope that after laying out the actions China has taken to grow its EV industry, the history of foreign entrants into the auto industry, the effectiveness of tariffs, and the effectiveness of other trade policies and the politics behind them, the conclusion of how to go forward is already clear.

In order to beat China, we need to stop messing around with comforting but ill-considered policies that won’t work, and instead commit ourselves to the massive industrial shift that we need in order to catch up with a country that has already been doing so for over a decade.

We cannot do this by moving slower than a target that is already ahead of us. We have to move faster. And the West doesn’t get there by taking $1 billion in bribes to tank domestic industry , by softening targets or backtracking on EV plans . In particular, having one party that actively opposes any attempt to prepare the US auto industry for the future is certainly not helpful. This back-and-forth is not happening in China – they are committed.

The US auto industry has become accustomed to offering huge, expensive gas guzzlers, and to being “the only game in town.” But that didn’t work for the US in the 70s, and it won’t work now.

One of the most common criticisms of EVs is their unaffordability, but the BYD Seagull will cost under $10k (domestically) and the sporty Xiaomi SU7 is about $30k . That might be hard to compete with, but the US has already seen a cheap, great EV in the form of the workmanlike Chevy Bolt , which cost under $20k new after incentives before production ended . So it’s possible, and just because it’s hard doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it.

Even if prices on small Chinese EVs are unattainable, the way to solve that is through smart industrial and materials policy (as China has spent years on and we’ve only just started), through targeted subsidy to a new and important industry (which we’re doing, though republicans want to eliminate that ), and by perhaps redirecting tax breaks that currently encourage giant vehicles to stop encouraging huge gas guzzlers and instead encourage right-sized EVs (and end other policies like the EPA footprint rule which EPA is finally doing something about ).

Top comment by Julio Alvarez

Brazilian here. Chinese car companies are trying to sell in Brazil for a long time, with very little success. But since last year they started to offer good quality cars with competitive prices, especially electric cars. I replaced VW tcross for a BYD Dolphin, my daughter change VW Polo for a Seagull and my father in law replaced a Toyota Yaris for a Seagull too. We were used to follow all news or trends from US ou Europe car brands. Now it is all about China and the new models that will come.

Then there’s the little issue of massive implicit subsidies to fossil fuels, costing the US economy $700 billion per year . The solution to that is to put a price on pollution , as supported by virtually all economists and a majority of Americans in every state , which would help to incentivize cleaner autos and disincentivize dirtier ones. And all of this is necessary to confront climate change, which we can do alongside taking actions to ensure we are ready for the future of automobiles.

So, if you’ll forgive me for taking this apparently unpopular anti-tariff stance, I think it’s clear that simply doubling the price of the competition isn’t the best way to ensure US auto stays competitive. It won’t help US consumers, it likely won’t have a net positive effect on US jobs (across sectors), it will lull industry into a false sense of security, it doesn’t help the environment, and perhaps least important but still worth mention, it violates the oft-repeated-but-never-honestly-held principle that government should “avoid picking winners and losers.”

Instead, lets focus on encouraging the new tech and discouraging the old tech, and moving quickly to beat China at their own game. If we want to pick winners, then why don’t we pick us .

This is how we get the American auto industry, a jewel in the crown of America for more than a century , into competitive shape for the future. We should have been doing more earlier, but as the famous ( possibly Chinese ) proverb says: “the best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, the second best time is today.”

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Jameson has been driving electric vehicles since 2009, and has been writing about them and about clean energy for electrek.co since 2016.

You can contact him at [email protected]

Jameson Dow's favorite gear

Aptera Referral Code

Use our Aptera Referral Code for $30 off a reservation for the upcoming Aptera electric vehicle.

Manage push notifications

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Driving — Pros and Cons Associated With Self-Driving Cars

Pros and Cons Associated with Self-driving Cars

• Categories: Cars Driving

About this sample

Words: 1760 |

Published: Feb 12, 2019

Words: 1760 | Pages: 4 | 9 min read

Information

• The “driver” sets a destination. The car’s software calculates a route and starts the car on its way.
• A rotating, roof-mounted LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging – a technology similar to radar) sensor monitors a 60-meter range around the car and creates a dynamic 3-D map of the car’s current environment
• A sensor on the left rear wheel monitors sideways movement to detect the car’s position relative to the 3-D map.
• Radar systems in the front and rear bumpers calculate distances to obstacles.
• Artificial intelligence (AI) software in the car is connected to all the sensors and has input from Google Street View and video cameras inside the car.
• The AI simulates human perceptual and decision-making processes and controls actions in driver-control systems such as steering and brakes.
• The car’s software consults Google Maps for advance notice of things like landmarks and traffic signs and lights.

Works Cited

• Auto. (n.d.). Self-driving cars will have a huge impact on society, but some industry leaders are getting cold feet. Auto.
• Eno Transportation. (2017). The future of driving: Self-driving cars, policy and planning implications. Eno Transportation.
• Forbes. (2015, January 5). 12 ways self-driving cars will transform your daily commute. Forbes.
• The Guardian. (2016, October 26). The security risks of self-driving cars. The Guardian.
• New York Times. (2015, May 5). Self-driving cars can make you money, save you money, or both. New York Times.
• Pacific Standard. (2018, March 15). The potential impact of self-driving cars on public transportation. Pacific Standard. https://psmag.com/economics/the-potential-impact-of-self-driving-cars-on-public-transportation
• Shladover, S. E. (2016). Autonomous vehicle implementation predictions. Transportation Research Record, 2542(1), 91-98.
• Teletrac. (2015, November 24). The pros and cons of self-driving cars. Teletrac. https://www.teletracnavman.com/blog/the-pros-and-cons-of-self-driving-cars
• U.S. Department of Transportation. (2019). Revised Departmental guidance on valuation of a statistical life in Departmental analyses. U.S. Department of Transportation.
• Vlasic, B. (2015, March 13). Auto industry races to adapt to self-driving cars. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/14/business/auto-industry-races-to-adapt-to-self-driving-cars.html

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 868 words

1 pages / 554 words

1 pages / 616 words

2 pages / 840 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Driving

Speeding is a common behavior on our roads and highways, often perceived as a minor traffic violation. However, it carries significant dangers that can lead to accidents, injuries, and even fatalities. This essay delves into the [...]

Have you ever found yourself gripping the wheel tightly, heart pounding, as you navigate through a sea of traffic filled with inexperienced teenage drivers? The debate over whether the driving age should be raised is a [...]

Imagine a world where every time you stepped into a car, you were taking a gamble with your life. Sadly, this is the reality for far too many people due to the devastating consequences of drunk driving. In my persuasive speech, [...]

Defensive driving is more than just a set of skills; it's a critical approach to the road that can save lives and prevent accidents. In this essay, we will explore the principles and importance of defensive driving, its role in [...]

Every year, thousands of lives are lost due to the dangerous combination of drinking and driving. The consequences of this reckless behavior are devastating, not only for the individuals involved but also for their families and [...]

Texting and driving has become a prevalent issue in today's society. With the widespread use of smartphones and the constant need to stay connected, many drivers have become dangerously distracted. This essay will argue that [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free