Posted on 04/27/2016 12:26:09 PM PDT by JOAT
A convoy of self-driving trucks recently drove across Europe and arrived at the Port of Rotterdam. No technology will automate away more jobs — or drive more economic efficiency — than the driverless truck.
Shipping a full truckload from L.A. to New York costs around $4,500 today, with labor representing 75 percent of that cost. But those labor savings aren’t the only gains to be had from the adoption of driverless trucks.
Where drivers are restricted by law from driving more than 11 hours per day without taking an 8-hour break, a driverless truck can drive nearly 24 hours per day. That means the technology would effectively double the output of the U.S. transportation network at 25 percent of the cost.
And the savings become even more significant when you account for fuel efficiency gains. The optimal cruising speed from a fuel efficiency standpoint is around 45 miles per hour, whereas truckers who are paid by the mile drive much faster. Further fuel efficiencies will be had as the self-driving fleets adopt platooning technologies, like those from Peloton Technology, allowing trucks to draft behind one another in highway trains.
Trucking represents a considerable portion of the cost of all the goods we buy, so consumers everywhere will experience this change as lower prices and higher standards of living.
While the efficiency gains are too real to pass up, the technology will have tremendous adverse effects as well.
In addition, once the technology is mature enough to be rolled out commercially, we will also enjoy considerable safety benefits. This year alone more people will be killed in traffic accidents involving trucks than in all domestic airline crashes in the last 45 years combined. At the same time, more truck drivers were killed on the job, 835, than workers in any other occupation in the U.S.
Even putting aside the direct safety risks, truck driving is a grueling job that young people don’t really want to do. The average age of a commercial driver is 55 (and rising every year), with projected driver shortages that will create yet more incentive to adopt driverless technology in the years to come.
While the efficiency gains are real — too real to pass up — the technology will have tremendous adverse effects as well. There are currently more than 1.6 million Americans working as truck drivers, making it the most common job in 29 states.
The loss of jobs representing 1 percent of the U.S. workforce will be a devastating blow to the economy. And the adverse consequences won’t end there. Gas stations, highway diners, rest stops, motels and other businesses catering to drivers will struggle to survive without them.
The demonstration in Europe shows that driverless trucking is right around the corner. The primary remaining barriers are regulatory. We still need to create on- and off-ramps so human drivers can bring trucks to the freeways where highway autopilot can take over. We may also need dedicated lanes as slow-moving driverless trucks could be a hazard for drivers. These are big projects that can only be done with the active support of government. However, regulators will be understandably reluctant to allow technology with the potential to eliminate so many jobs.
Yet the benefits from adopting it will be so huge that we can’t simply outlaw it. A 400 percent price-performance improvement in ground transportation networks will represent an incredible boost to human well-being. Where would we be if we had banned mechanized agriculture on the grounds that most Americans worked in farming when tractors and harvesters were introduced in the early 20th century?
We often discuss the displacement of jobs by artificial intelligence and robots in the abstract, as something that we’ll have to eventually tackle in the far distant future. But the recent successful demonstration of the self-driving truck shows that we can’t afford to put off the conversation on how we’re going to adapt to this new reality.
Oh, and will a model of robot that did not yield the right of way often enough, lose its license system wide? Because all of its instances would be equally faulty?
A trucking firm can fire a lousy human driver and get another decent driver. Imagine it having to lean on a model of robot and having that model disqualified.
“Trucking represents a considerable portion of the cost of all the goods we buy, so consumers everywhere will experience this change as lower prices and higher standards of living. “
HAHAHAHAH, oh man.. It’ll mean higher standards of living and more profits for a few, but those savings will NEVER be passed down to the customer.
Many companies have direct rail access. ALL companies have direct road access.
Repeating yourself doesn’t make you right. They do come close, they do most of it. The only reason there’s a driver in them is the law. They mostly don’t do anything, they’re ballast.
Remember most auto insurance companies do other forms of liability. So there’s a good chance they’re insuring the driver AND the company that made the car. What happens when the robot doesn’t yield the right of way is the same thing that happens when the person doesn’t: they pay for a replacement car and the owner’s rates go up.
It’s not optimism, and it’s not irrational. It’s paying attention to how things actually work. These cars are succeeding on the road right now. Some are available to consumers right now. Nobody is saying anything about giving up their cars. It’s a feature, just like any other. Some won’t buy the feature, especially for the first decade or so when it will only be in luxury cars. But just like cruise control it’ll work it’s way down.
What happens when a model of car repeatedly has the same mechanical problem? I had my car computer updated on a recall last year. There’s a system in place that already knows how to handle these things, and nothing really changes about it.
According to Google, that ‘ballast’ had to take control over 300 times in a 1 year period. Close doesn’t count.
Ha. I was just talking about this Sunday.
So if the mist common job in many states is truck driver, how all my anti-socialist fan boys, will you feed this families whose father is suddenly over 40, unemployed and untrained? The Democrats will have an answer: reverse income taxes, aka EITC.
GPS, military grade?
Ban Robots.
Butlerian Jihad.
Orange Catholic Bible.
>> thought that was called a Train...
Excellent response.
“Who do you thinks pays for all that if you are an independent trucker?”
Diesel fuel, taxes, tolls, maintenance and depreciation, payment on the truck loan, will have to be paid even if the truck is driverless.
mark
Good points. Sounds like this stuff has lots of failure points.
I agree that it will be gradual. It will start with the elderly, they are already placing restrictions there such as yearly license renewal. On the other side, the younger generation don’t value driving as much. Many are waiting for their license or living in metropolitan areas and not getting it at all.
55 speed limit did fail, but it also shows they will try.
Think of it as one of the next big things for Democrats... they’ve been all about trying to ‘rebuild the infrastructure’ for years.
Over 1 million miles drive and the people only took control 300 times. And of course you’re ignoring the Tesla, Mercedes and BMW work with that.
It’s interesting how the next generation has no interest in driving. I think it’s because they grew up with the internet. When we were teenagers driving drastically increased the scope of our world. Current teenagers have had access to the entire world through the internet all their lives, driving actually decreases their world, because you can’t play on the net when you’re driving.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.