tag:theconversation.com,2011:/au/topics/department-of-transportation-31601/articlesDepartment of Transportation – The Conversation2018-09-28T10:34:51Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1027012018-09-28T10:34:51Z2018-09-28T10:34:51ZFreezing fuel economy standards will slow innovation and make US auto companies less competitive<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237600/original/file-20180923-129844-1qkmd1u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A half-century of regulation has greatly increased the fuel efficiency of US-made cars.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/filling-gas-station-fill-tank-self-593596127?src=7OxG-_3geo-5Ml7dWb-I4Q-1-26">siam.pukkato</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The United States has led the world in establishing standards and regulations governing vehicle fuel economy, tailpipe emissions and safety. Over the past 50 years, these policies have made the world cleaner and safer. Now the Trump administration is moving to <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/us-epa-and-dot-propose-fuel-economy-standards-my-2021-2026-vehicles">freeze fuel economy and tailpipe emission standards for new cars</a>, instead of carrying forward with the latest round of improvements mandated under President Obama.</p>
<p>At Ohio State University’s <a href="https://car.osu.edu/">Center for Automotive Research</a>, we work with manufacturers and U.S. government agencies to reduce vehicles’ environmental impact and enhance their safety, intelligence and autonomy. This industry is undergoing epochal changes as it works to evolve into a connected, shared and automated mobility enterprise, to address growing congestion in an increasingly urbanized world, and to improve safety and fuel economy. </p>
<p>This revolution is the greatest disruption in this industry since the automobile was introduced at the turn of the 19th century. In my view, which is <a href="http://www.autonews.com/article/20180925/OEM11/180929845/trump-ford-uaw-fuel-economy-standards">shared by major automobile manufacturers</a>, the Trump administration’s position is at odds with significant investments and progress that the industry has achieved over the past half-century. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/238392/original/file-20180927-48631-9jp01j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/238392/original/file-20180927-48631-9jp01j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/238392/original/file-20180927-48631-9jp01j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/238392/original/file-20180927-48631-9jp01j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/238392/original/file-20180927-48631-9jp01j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/238392/original/file-20180927-48631-9jp01j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/238392/original/file-20180927-48631-9jp01j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/238392/original/file-20180927-48631-9jp01j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Cars line up at a Washington, D.C., service station, Dec. 1, 1973, during an export embargo by oil producing countries. The embargo caused gasoline shortages and spurred action to improve the fuel economy of U.S.-built cars.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Watchf-Associated-Press-Domestic-News-Finance-D-/8d1c3ef9699841018396bd75dab6ee1b/1/0">AP Photo/Harvey Georges</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What makes drivers safer?</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-08-24/pdf/2018-16820.pdf">Trump administration’s proposal</a> repeats a long-standing argument that tightening fuel economy requirements will make vehicles less safe because manufacturers will comply by making vehicles lighter. In fact, the U.S. auto industry has widely employed alternative materials, such as high-strength steel, aluminum, magnesium, plastics and composites, to help improve fuel economy for many years, along with many other technologies related to engine, transmission and hybrid-electric powertrain technology. </p>
<p>Even though the average size of vehicles in the U.S. fleet has increased, average vehicle weight has remained constant for the past 15 years, while fuel economy has improved considerably. And automakers still have to comply with <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/ratings">crash worthiness ratings</a> set by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. There really is little or no correlation between vehicle safety and fuel economy. As recent crash test results show, fuel-efficient cars <a href="https://www.consumerreports.org/fuel-economy-efficiency/safety-has-become-key-issue-battle-over-fuel-economy/">can achieve excellent safety ratings</a>.</p>
<p><iframe id="zJD7i" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/zJD7i/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The Trump administration also contends that continuing to increase fuel economy requirements will <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/make-cars-great-again-1533170415">make the overall vehicle fleet less safe</a>. This happens, officials assert, because increased costs will deter consumers from buying new vehicles equipped with more advanced technology that improves safety, and consumer choice determines vehicle replacement cycles.</p>
<p>But this argument is demonstrably wrong. Annual vehicle sales in the United States since 2009 – the lowest year in vehicle sales since 1982 – have <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/199983/us-vehicle-sales-since-1951/">steadily increased</a>, from 10.4 million in 2009 to over 17 million in 2015-2017. Penetration of vehicles with improved fuel economy and safety over the past decade has been tremendous. Over 80 million new vehicles have been purchased in the last five years, representing more than 25 percent of the U.S. vehicle fleet.</p>
<h2>Progress on fuel economy and safety</h2>
<p>In an eloquent <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.67.2.887">1970 article</a>, Caltech chemist Arie Jan Haagen-Smit – a pioneer in air pollution research – made a strong case for setting federal air pollution standards. Since then, decades of research by government and industry have made cars in the United States dramatically cleaner and safer.</p>
<p>Two federal agencies, both created in 1970, govern fuel economy, emissions and motor vehicle safety. The Environmental Protection Agency develops regulations aimed at reducing vehicle tailpipe emissions of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter. </p>
<p>The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA, ensures that all new vehicles and certain categories of vehicle equipment comply with federal safety standards. And it works to increase the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks, both to help consumers save money at the pump and to reduce carbon pollution that contributes to climate change.</p>
<p>NHTSA was established by the <a href="http://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1951-2000/The-Highway-Safety-Act-of-1966/">Highway Safety Act</a>, which was spurred by consumer advocate Ralph Nader’s 1965 book “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/27/automobiles/50-years-ago-unsafe-at-any-speed-shook-the-auto-world.html">Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile</a>.” Nader’s best-seller denounced the auto industry’s lack of commitment to produce safe vehicles and identified a government role in promoting vehicle safety.</p>
<p>In recent decades NHTSA has issued regulations aimed at preventing accidents, including requirements for anti-lock brakes and electronic stability control systems. The agency has worked systematically to make vehicles safer, not just by ruling on their crashworthiness, but more importantly by promoting the use of crash avoidance technology. As the industry increasingly focuses on automated vehicles, NHTSA rulings and regulations are likely to continue to develop in that direction. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nL4_cYGdASs?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Advanced vehicle safety system can make cars of all sizes safer to operate.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Interestingly, NHTSA is the agency that maintains fuel economy standards, rather than the EPA. This indicates that Congress viewed fuel economy regulations not as a tailpipe emission concern – although fuel economy is directly correlated with carbon emissions – but as an issue that affected vehicles’ cost of operation. </p>
<h2>Competing in a global market</h2>
<p>Current CAFE regulations, which were <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2012/08/28/obama-administration-finalizes-historic-545-mpg-fuel-efficiency-standard">modified by the Obama administration in 2012</a>, require continuous improvements in fuel economy through the year 2025 to reach an average fleet fuel economy of 54.5 miles per gallon. They are indexed based on vehicle footprints so that larger vehicles, such as sport utility vehicles and light trucks, are not subject to the same requirements as smaller passenger cars. </p>
<p>Automakers receive credits for vehicles that run on <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy">alternative fuels or electricity</a>, but the regulations are not about electric vehicles, which represent a minuscule fraction of the current market. One way manufacturers can meet the new regulations is by adopting hybrid-electric powertrains. Other options include advanced 9- and 10-speed transmissions and innovative engine technologies, such as direct injection and turbocharging. </p>
<p>All of these technologies are increasingly present in the U.S. vehicle fleet. Fuel economy regulations have helped to ensure that the United States remains a technology leader and can effectively compete with automakers in Europe and Asia.</p>
<p><iframe id="Z9uJY" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Z9uJY/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>In 2016 NHTSA, the EPA and the <a href="https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/">California Air Resources Board</a> performed a <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/es/corporate-average-fuel-economy/light-duty-cafe-midterm-evaluation">midterm evaluation</a> of these regulations to assess their effectiveness and determine the incremental cost of such regulations to the automotive industry, and hence to consumers. It drew on a <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21744/cost-effectiveness-and-deployment-of-fuel-economy-technologies-for-light-duty-vehicles">2015 study</a> by the National Academy of Engineering that provided a comprehensive assessment of technologies to improve fuel economy and related implementation costs. </p>
<p>This report concluded that by adopting global platforms, major automobile manufacturers have achieved economies of scale in the introduction of new technologies. It recommended quantifying the estimated cost to manufacturers of adopting various technologies in terms of dollars spent to increase fuel economy by a given percentage – in other words, linking increased product cost to savings at the fuel pump. In many cases, when the cost of the technology is amortized over a period of three to five years, these savings outweigh the costs. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/238214/original/file-20180926-48656-8ruks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/238214/original/file-20180926-48656-8ruks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/238214/original/file-20180926-48656-8ruks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/238214/original/file-20180926-48656-8ruks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/238214/original/file-20180926-48656-8ruks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/238214/original/file-20180926-48656-8ruks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/238214/original/file-20180926-48656-8ruks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/238214/original/file-20180926-48656-8ruks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">All new cars starting with model year 2013 carry this sticker, designed to help consumers make informed choices about fuel economy and costs and vehicle emissions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/corporate-average-fuel-economy/fuel-economy-and-environment-label">NHTSA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The United States is not the only market for U.S. automakers. All major automobile-manufacturing regions in the world have enacted comparable fuel economy regulations, expressed in terms of carbon dioxide emissions at the vehicle tailpipe in grams per kilometer traveled. The European Union, China, Japan and South Korea have also required manufacturers to make vehicles progressively more fuel-efficient, although U.S. standards are somewhat less stringent due to the larger average vehicle size in the North American market. </p>
<p>The auto business is a global industry in which manufacturers sell similar products on multiple continents through the use of global platforms. U.S. automakers want consistent standards so they will not have to incur the cost of designing and producing vehicles that do not have global marketability. </p>
<p>The regulations that the Trump administration wants to freeze are aligned with this principle, and are also consistent with the U.S. auto industry’s desire to retain its technology leadership position in the global market.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102701/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Giorgio Rizzoni does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Do high fuel economy requirements make the US auto fleet less safe? The Trump administration says yes and is moving to freeze these standards, but auto experts and US car makers disagree.Giorgio Rizzoni, Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace and Electrical and Computer Engineering and Director, Center for Automotive Research, The Ohio State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/719362017-01-30T03:51:39Z2017-01-30T03:51:39ZIt’s pedal to the metal for driverless cars<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154451/original/image-20170126-30413-1x3mtq3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">An NVIDIA-powered Audi needs no driver.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Gadget-Show-Nvidia/7681a54ff1a04bf88569a74fea1eafd2/35/0">AP Photo/John Locher</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When a May 2016 crash <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/30/tesla-autopilot-death-self-driving-car-elon-musk">killed the person operating</a> a Tesla Model S driving in <a href="https://www.tesla.com/autopilot">Autopilot mode</a>, advocates of autonomous vehicles feared a slowdown in development of self-driving cars.</p>
<p>Instead <a href="https://theconversation.com/after-fatality-autonomous-car-development-may-speed-up-63488">the opposite has occurred</a>. In August, <a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/08/17/490406911/ford-looks-to-a-fleet-of-driverless-cars">Ford publicly committed to field self-driving cars</a> by 2021. In September, <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/14/1386711/">Uber began picking up passengers with self-driving cars</a> in Pittsburgh, albeit with safety drivers ready to take over.</p>
<p>October saw Tesla itself undeterred by the fatality. The company began producing cars it said had all the <a href="http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/news/a31237/tesla-autopilot-hardware-standard/">hardware needed for autonomous operation</a>; the software will be written and added later. In December, days after Michigan established regulations for testing autonomous vehicles in December, General Motors started doing just that with <a href="http://fortune.com/2016/12/15/gm-self-driving-cars-michigan/">self-driving Chevy Bolts</a>. And just one day before the end of his term, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx designated 10 research centers as <a href="http://www.govtech.com/fs/transportation/U-S-DOT-Names-10-Proving-Ground-Sites-Testing-Autonomous-Vehicles.html/">official test sites for automated vehicle systems</a>.</p>
<p>Three of the most significant developments in the industry happened earlier this month. The <a href="http://www.ces.tech/Show-Floor/Marketplaces/Self-Driving-Technology.aspx">2017 Consumer Electronics Show (CES)</a> in Las Vegas and the <a href="http://naias.com/">North American International Auto Show</a> in Detroit saw automakers new and old (and their suppliers) show off their <a href="http://www.npr.org/2017/01/11/509265974/auto-show-lesson-the-difference-between-driverless-and-self-driving-cars">plans and innovations</a> in this arena. And the <a href="https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2016/INCLA-PE16007-7876.PDF">National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued its report</a> on the Tesla fatality. Together, they suggest a future filled with driverless cars that are both safer than today’s vehicles and radically different in appearance and comfort.</p>
<h2>Confirmation of safety</h2>
<p>The NHTSA report contained a key finding that will no doubt further fuel the autonomous vehicle movement. Beyond finding no safety defect in the Tesla vehicle, and even aside from its decision not to order a recall of the car, the official government report declared that <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-tesla-autopilot-20170119-story.html">autonomous cars are safer than human-driven ones</a>.</p>
<p>To make its finding, the agency analyzed data <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-20/the-tesla-advantage-1-3-billion-miles-of-data">Tesla collects remotely</a> from all its cars. It compared the number of times airbags deployed in Tesla cars that have Autopilot and earlier models without it. That’s one way of determining how many serious accidents the cars were involved in. </p>
<p>The data revealed that the accident rate was much lower in Tesla cars equipped with Autopilot. Cars with Autopilot had airbags deploy once in every 1.3 million miles of driving; those without Autopilot deployed their airbags once every 800,000 miles. (The <a href="https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2016/INCLA-PE16007-7876.PDF">NHTSA cautioned</a> that Tesla’s Autopilot requires the full attention of the driver, and noted that driver inattention contributed to the fatal crash.) Paradoxically, the Tesla accident, tragic though it was, may ultimately increase confidence in autonomous vehicle technologies, thanks to the NHTSA investigation.</p>
<h2>Manufacturers join the fray</h2>
<p>Those safer cars of the future will not all be Teslas, though. While Google’s seven-year-long effort to develop an autonomous car <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-12/google-car-project-loses-leaders-and-advantage-as-rivals-gain">has hit a few bumps</a>, CES exhibits from major existing car companies showed strong progress. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/riding-in-cars-with-computers-how-tech-at-ces-changes-driving-ces-2017/">Audi, BMW, Chrysler, Ford, GM, Honda, Hyundai, Nissan and Toyota</a> all highlighted their efforts to catch up with upstart Tesla. Some of these traditional car companies displayed radical ideas, such as <a href="https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/chrysler-focuses-on-a-future-generation-with-a-minivan-at-ces-2017/">retractable steering wheels</a>, <a href="https://techcrunch.com/video/toyota-debuts-its-concept-i-at-ces/586d5d71509549648405fe7c/">scissor doors</a> and on-board AI assistants like <a href="http://www.geekwire.com/2017/ford-turning-cars-amazon-alexa-devices-starting-month/">Amazon’s Alexa</a>.</p>
<p>Industry suppliers are also joining the game. Auto parts giant Delphi demonstrated a <a href="https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/delphis-self-driving-car-deals-with-rude-drivers-in-vegas-ces-2017/">self-driving Audi SQ5 SUV</a> on the streets of Las Vegas, the result of a partnership with <a href="http://www.theverge.com/2016/12/1/13791848/delphi-mobileye-self-driving-car-pittsburgh-intel-maps">collision detection innovator Mobileye</a>. And French supplier Navya showed off an all-electric <a href="http://navya.tech/?lang=en">self-driving minibus</a>. </p>
<h2>New developments arise</h2>
<p>A new player on the scene is <a href="http://www.nvidia.com">microprocessor innovator NVIDIA</a>, whose <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpdc.2012.04.003">graphics processing units</a> are much better at handling large amounts of data quickly than conventional computer chips have been. The company has developed extremely power-efficient processors that are supporting <a href="https://techcrunch.com/video/nvidias-self-driving-test-cars-at-ces/58733bfa869ea92c996de75e/">deep learning for autonomous driving on an Audi Q7</a>. Deep learning allows the vehicle to learn from examples and from experience, improving its performance in varying conditions over time. These systems can <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/04/nvidia-builds-a-co-pilot-into-its-autonomous-drive-computer/">support drivers</a> who are personally operating their vehicles: for instance, noticing the driver is looking to the left and might not see a cyclist approaching on the right. <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/09/take-a-ride-with-us-in-a-self-driving-audi-q7-using-nvidia-autonomous-tech/">Tesla is already using NVIDIA supercomputers</a> in its vehicles, and Mercedes is working on <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/06/nvidia-and-mercedes-benz-to-bring-an-ai-car-to-market-within-a-year/">integrating NVIDIA artificial intelligence</a> into its products.</p>
<p>In addition, sensor technologies are both <a href="http://www.consumerreports.org/autonomous-driving/autonomous-vehicles-ces-2017/">getting better and far more economical</a>. This is true most notably of <a href="http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/lidar.html">LIDAR</a>, a laser-based sensing method widely used in driverless cars. </p>
<p>With confidence in their safety boosts, and the enormous advances in technology, the future for driverless cars is as bright as the Las Vegas strip.</p>
<p><em>Updated February 10, 2017, to correct the name of the federal agency that issued a report on the Tesla crash.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/71936/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>William Messner is affiliated with the Democratic Party. </span></em></p>Together, three recent events mark a crucial turning point in the development of autonomous cars: They are both safer and more advanced than ever before.William C. Messner, John R. Beaver Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Tufts UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/658912016-09-26T16:26:35Z2016-09-26T16:26:35ZWill driving your own car become the socially unacceptable public health risk smoking is today?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139085/original/image-20160924-29912-ywt4nm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C1444%2C1029&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Public health double whammy?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/djou/91564163">Julien</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In 2014, over <a href="http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalityfacts/overview-of-fatality-facts">32,000 people were killed in car crashes</a> in the U.S. In 2012, <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/crash-injuries/">more than two million Americans visited the emergency room</a> as a result of car crashes. And an estimated <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/AV%20policy%20guidance%20PDF.pdf">94 percent of the crashes</a> that cause these injuries and fatalities are attributable to human choice or error.</p>
<p>These are sobering statistics. And because human behavior is at the heart of them, they raise an interesting question: Once we can take people out of the equation, could driving your own car become as socially frowned on as other risky habits, like smoking?</p>
<p>It’s less an intriguing hypothetical than a near-future public health question thanks to the rapid development and emergence of self-driving cars. And <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/AV/federal-automated-vehicles-policy-september-2016">a new federal policy</a> for automated vehicles from the U.S. Department of Transportation has just given self-driving cars another nudge forward.</p>
<h2>Technology coming on fast, social consequences to follow</h2>
<p>Self-driving cars have progressed in leaps and bounds in recent years. In 2004, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency <a href="http://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2014-03-13">launched an autonomous vehicle grand challenge</a>: Build a robotic vehicle able to “navigate 300 miles of rugged terrain between Los Angeles and Las Vegas.” In the first event, the top-scoring vehicle managed a meager 7.5 miles.</p>
<p>Twelve years later, autonomous vehicles are heading toward becoming commonplace. The Tesla Model S, for instance, comes ready-equipped with the company’s “<a href="https://www.tesla.com/presskit/autopilot">autopilot</a>.” Top car manufacturers like <a href="http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/hands-off-heres-what-its-like-to-ride-in-fords-autonomous-cars/">Ford</a> and <a href="http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2016/09/13/Volvo-builds-its-first-self-driving-car/1181473763575/">Volvo</a> are investing heavily in self-driving vehicles. And <a href="https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/">Google</a> and <a href="https://www.wired.com/2016/09/heres-like-ride-ubers-self-driving-car/">Uber</a> already have test vehicles on the road.</p>
<p>Granted, these cars don’t have to navigate the desert terrain of the DARPA challenge (although it could be argued that urban roads present an altogether tougher challenge). And they’re still far from perfect (as recent crashes involving <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/23/a-google-self-driving-car-crashed-in-mt-view-today/">Google</a> and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/07/01/business/inside-tesla-accident.html">Tesla</a> vehicles demonstrate). Even so, progress over the past decade has been meteoric, and as self-driving cars learn from each near-miss, scrape and full-blown crash, it’s likely to become faster still.</p>
<p>As we move toward a driverless car society, the social impacts are likely to be profound. The <a href="http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/ten-ways-autonomous-driving-could-redefine-the-automotive-world">anticipated reduction in road deaths and injuries alone</a> makes a complete transition to driverless vehicles a compelling public health proposition. But there are likely to be other benefits as well: increased mobility and autonomy for the elderly and the disabled; less gridlock; the chance for multitaskers to catch up on office email on the way to work (or even grab an extra 30-minute snooze).</p>
<p>It’s potential benefits such as these – and the risks of not realizing them, perhaps because of irresponsible development or over-restrictive regulations – that have prompted the Department of Transportation to pull together the <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/AV/federal-automated-vehicles-policy-september-2016">just-released federal policy</a> for automated vehicles. (DOT uses the term “Highly Automated Vehicles,” which includes those that interact with each other and traffic control systems, as well as drive themselves.)</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139083/original/image-20160924-29921-135lnqy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139083/original/image-20160924-29921-135lnqy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139083/original/image-20160924-29921-135lnqy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=352&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139083/original/image-20160924-29921-135lnqy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=352&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139083/original/image-20160924-29921-135lnqy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=352&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139083/original/image-20160924-29921-135lnqy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139083/original/image-20160924-29921-135lnqy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139083/original/image-20160924-29921-135lnqy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Wise regulation clears the road for responsible development of autonomous cars.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/artvlive/26169076605">Automotive Rhythms</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A smart policy around these smart cars</h2>
<p>To get a sense of just how smart the new DOT policy is, it’s worth measuring it up against a concept that’s been around for a while now: <a href="http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/at-work/innovation/what-does-responsible-innovation-mean">Responsible Innovation</a> (or, if you’re in Europe, <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/responsible-research-innovation">Responsible Research and Innovation</a>).</p>
<p>In 2013, three British academics, <a href="https://www.ucl.ac.uk/sts/staff/stilgoe">Jack Stilgoe</a>, <a href="http://business-school.exeter.ac.uk/about/people/profile/index.php?web_id=Richard_Owen">Richard Owen</a> and <a href="http://www.academicroom.com/users/p.m.macnaghten">Phil Macnaghten</a>, published their ideas on <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008">a framework for Responsible Innovation</a>. They (and many of their colleagues – including myself) were interested in how we develop powerful and complex new technologies in today’s highly interconnected world so that they benefit society, rather than causing more problems than they resolve.</p>
<p>This trio wasn’t the first to grapple with how to innovate responsibly, and they’re far from the last (in fact, this is now a <a href="https://cns.asu.edu/viri">vibrant area of study</a> around the world). But to me, their framework has the benefits of intellectual rigor along with real-world applicability.</p>
<p>Stilgoe and his coauthors suggest that four things are important for innovation to proceed responsibly:</p>
<ol>
<li>Anticipate what’s coming down the pike, and what it’s likely to do.</li>
<li>Be aware of limitations and open to new ideas.</li>
<li>Include key stakeholders – including members of the public – in policymaking.</li>
<li>Be responsive to emerging needs, challenges and opportunities.</li>
</ol>
<p>The new DOT policy does a pretty good job of ticking the boxes here. It anticipates where autonomous vehicle technologies are going, and the potential benefits and pitfalls. It acknowledges the limitations of current understanding on how to ensure responsible development. It emphasizes the need to work with members of the public and others as the technology matures. And it’s designed evolve and grow alongside the technology and its social impacts.</p>
<p>This is a refreshing change from attempting to retrofit existing regulations to new technologies – which is often the <em>modus operandi</em> for government agencies. And it indicates a willingness at the federal level to promote successful and responsible development through innovative policymaking. Instead of trying to dictate what self-driving cars should look like, the DOT has developed flexible rules that encourage manufacturers to innovate toward an autonomous vehicle industry that’s socially beneficial as well as economically viable.</p>
<p>This makes the new policy an interesting and unfolding case study in the governance and regulation of emerging technologies. It could end up being a useful model for regulating around other tech innovations as they arise. But it’s also a fascinating experiment in policy-driven public health intervention.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139086/original/image-20160924-29880-29gla.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139086/original/image-20160924-29880-29gla.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139086/original/image-20160924-29880-29gla.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139086/original/image-20160924-29880-29gla.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139086/original/image-20160924-29880-29gla.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139086/original/image-20160924-29880-29gla.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139086/original/image-20160924-29880-29gla.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139086/original/image-20160924-29880-29gla.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">What’s government’s responsibility once technology evolves far enough that it’s safer than human drivers?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Car_accident.jpeg">Harui Lee</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Rule-making and public health risks</h2>
<p>To understand this, consider those stats on car crash deaths in the U.S. They represent a substantial public health challenge and, according to the National Safety Council, translate to <a href="http://www.nsc.org/learn/safety-knowledge/Pages/injury-facts-chart.aspx">one in every 113 deaths each year</a> in the U.S. being associated with car crashes. </p>
<p>Reducing crash-related deaths by a factor of 10 through the widespread introduction of self-driving cars (not an unrealistic projection, given how many are due to human behavior) would push this down to car crashes being associated with roughly one in every 1,000 deaths. And potentially, as advanced automated vehicle technologies adapt and mature, this could conceivably be pushed as low as one in 10,000, or even lower - putting the chances of being killed in a car crash on a par with <a href="http://www.nsc.org/learn/safety-knowledge/Pages/injury-facts-chart.aspx">dying as a result of exposure to excessive natural heat</a>. The impact on injuries and associated medical expenses is likely to be even more significant.</p>
<p>These projections – speculative as they are – are compelling enough to suggest that, at some point, human-driven vehicles will be seen as a public health risk to be managed and ultimately eliminated.</p>
<p>This may sound nearly inconceivable in today’s car culture. But the <a href="http://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-0798">dramatic shift in attitudes toward smoking in recent years</a> is a testament to how public health campaigns, regulations and a changing culture can radically alter social norms.</p>
<p>I suspect that this prospect will induce a shudder of fear in some. Protestations about an erosion of the American way of life and a restriction of personal liberties are bound to follow. This in itself raises questions around what “responsibility” means – does it simply mean reducing the risk of injury and death, or does it also mean protecting other things that are important to people, like freedom and culture?</p>
<p>Because of questions like this, responsible innovation depends on ensuring everyone potentially touched by a new technology has the chance to be a part of guiding how it’s developed and used. And it’s why the ability to constantly evaluate and, if necessary, adjust the trajectories of emerging technologies is so important.</p>
<p>Here, the new DOT policy for self-driving cars is a solid step in the right direction. Whether it is successful in practice remains to be seen. But the signs are encouraging.</p>
<p>In the meantime, the public health expert in me is excited by the prospect that, through smart policies and innovative technologies, we could one day make crash-related deaths and injuries a thing of the past.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/65891/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Improved autonomous vehicle technology could reduce the tens of thousands of annual U.S. deaths due to human error behind the wheel. Are driverless cars the next big public health intervention?Andrew Maynard, Director, Risk Innovation Lab, Arizona State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.