Self-driving cars are a technological promise which we are aware of since the fifties. As such, we are all vaguely aware of its potential but we underestimate self-driving cars true potential. Not only will our cities be radically transformed, the time and money that can be made available to car owners might lead to the biggest increase in consumer spending in history.

I recently provided first aid in a pretty serious car crash between a Tesla and an old Porsche. The person in the Tesla got out of the car, shocked but unharmed. The people in the old Porsche were not so lucky. Their injuries were serious, and we were doubtful if they would survive the crash in those first couple of minutes. There was not much we could do apart from comforting them, keeping their necks from moving too much and waiting for ambulance to arrive. It was an intense experience I will not quickly forget.

One of the first things I heard people saying afterwards was: “that Tesla was probably self-driving”. I remember thinking: “I wish it had”.

Just a few weeks earlier I had the unique opportunity of sitting in a self-driving Tesla model 3. It felt like an epiphany. I was always a (hardcore) fan of Tesla, especially the concept of self-driving cars, and was eagerly awaiting my time to drive in one. After this ride, I felt like being in the future. A child-hood promise had come true. I sat in a car that was driving on its own.

Self-driving cars are a hot topic because we all feel they will impact our lives in a profound way. Whether some view it as a positive change, others as negative, we all see it coming and we are wondering what it will bring us.

In the debate surrounding self-driving cars I hear a lot of people saying that they will not give up driving because “they like it so much”. Sure, there are some of you who are really into driving (or cars in general) and are not eager to give it up. This argument to me comes across like the dawn of the mobile phone, where a lot of people claimed they would never use such a device because “they like fixed phones better”. Now there are more smartphones than toilets in Africa.

Mostly though, I question people who state they will not use self-driving cars because I believe most people do not understand the potential. There is little to no talk about the transformation of our cities once we have self-driving cars. There is a lot of discussion on who is responsible in a car crash with a self-driving car, but most people conveniently forget the fact that a lot of the legal framework for self-driving cars is already resolved. Most importantly, we never talk about the fact that self-driving cars will provide us with the biggest boost in income and of spare time since the second world war (some even say in recorded history). In this article I will elaborate upon these underrated arguments and try to show other, more unknown arguments in the debate surrounding self-driving cars.

Cities consist largely of non-used space thanks to cars

This point was made clear to me when I saw the below picture. Even though I have lived in a city my whole life, it never occurred to me that “modern” cities revolve around cars. They are usually at the heart of a city planner’s design. If you take on the visitor-from-Mars view, where you look down on Earth for the first time and pretend to look at it like an alien would do, you would see that everything revolves around cars. It is estimated about 50 to 80% of the surface of inner cities are dedicated to serve cars (roads, parking spaces and garages). All this space can be considered “forbidden” for the pedestrian.

Roads are important, of course, but why do we let cars dictate our city planning while we can resolve this by having self-driving cars? Why do we exclude people from 50% to 80% of the city space? Imagine how beautiful cities would become if suddenly we have no need for all those roads and parking anymore. We can build regular parks with trees, recreational areas and ice-cream shops. We can take back the cities!

This short movie clip below shows the impact self-driving cars can have on our living environment in a profound way. As with the picture above it too was an eye-opener for me, and showed me the impact this can make on our cities and societies in general.

The legal issue of who is “responsible” in a crash is mostly* solved

In times of crisis, we humans like to point fingers to each other and ask: “Who is responsible?!”. We are naturally inclined to blame someone. We need scapegoats in order to process the emotions of a bad event. It makes us feel better and in control of the situation. Even when it is no ones’ fault in particular, we like to point fingers. Why? Because it creates a sense of order in a chaotic world. With self-driving cars, the elephant in the room is of course: who is to blame? Who is responsible in a crash involving autonomous vehicles? The “driver”? The car manufacturer? The software engineer?

It seems that for most crashes in the future, there might not be such thing as “responsibility” anymore.

When I attended an event on the topic of autonomous vehicles in Amsterdam in 2016, I was shocked to hear legal specialists claim the issue of “who is responsible when a self-driving car crashes” is pretty much solved. While I was under the impression that legal issues were the biggest impediment of introducing self-driving cars, they claimed this was not the case. Why is that? In legal terms because the insurance moves from a traditional negligence system to a no-fault system. This means that after an accident, compensation to victims is provided quickly and does not depend on the identification of a party at-fault. In such systems (travel insurance is an example) individual drivers would be well protected and would encourage the adoption of autonomous cars for its safety and cost-related benefits. Let’s try to explain it in plain English with an example.

Approximately 90% of all crashes are due to human error. This suggest that a reduction in car-crashing of almost 90% can be achieved with autonomous vehicles, as there would be no humans available to do the crashing (though I bet we still have the ability to screw things up in some cases). Nevertheless, when a crash does happen in a no-fault system, there is no “responsible” person. It’s simply a crash and all parties get compensated for any damages. Compare this to the situation where you drop your phone and get a new one from your insurance. Depending on your insurance provisions, you will be compensated without any investigation.

For argument’s sake, let us take the situation where the human error aspect of car crashes is taken out. This leaves us in a situation that is quite familiar. Car manufacturers already take responsibility for design and fabrication errors. Excluding pronounced spikes in activity, the number of vehicles recalled has generally ranged from 15 million to 20 million per year over the past 20 years. Consequently car manufacturers already take responsibility and they will do the same with self-driving cars: Volvo has already announced that it will pay for any injuries or damaged caused by its fully autonomous software, which it expects to start selling in 2020.

To summarize: in a world where human errors are removed, the matter of responsibility is removed from the equation and any liability in case of negligence is transferred away from the driver. Besides, crashes should in no way impede the implementation of self-driving cars. We should never forget that one of the ultimate goals here is saving more lives in the long run, which self-driving cars arguably will do.

Do we have any clue what to do with the available time and money?

Most people probably do not realize just how much self-driving cars will impact our way of living. Just imagine the impact self-driving cars will have on your daily commute (for those of you lucky enough to be able to commute every day). In the U.S., the average one-way commute time is 26.1 minutes, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. If you commute to a full-time 5-day-a-week job, that adds up to 4.35 hours a week and over 200 hours (nearly nine days) per year. Europeans perform even better in this regard. On average, European workers spend 1 hour and 24 minutes a day commuting, travelling 28.56 km in total. That adds up to an average of 14 hours a week, 658 hours or just over 27 days per year. Just think about the all the activities you could do if you do not have to commute by car one month a year:

• You could spend your time commuting by doing work, which would reduce your average “working day” in the office to just over 5 hours a day.

• You could perform all your family chores (like online holiday shopping) while you travel, giving you almost 3 hours extra per day with your family.

• If you’re into watching series, you could binge watch Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Grey’s Anatomy, How I Met Your Mother, Mad Men, Sherlock, The Big Bang Theory, The Walking Dead and Westworld each year.

It does not end there. You will receive more than just spare time: you save a lot of money. In May 2017, ReThinkx published a report in which the researchers suggested that the average U.S. family will save $5600 annually, the equivalent of a 10 percent raise in salary. This, the report suggests, will lead to the biggest increase in consumer spending in history.

Now honestly, would you really say you rather spend $500 per month just to keep sitting behind your wheel?

Time. Money. The freedom to never have to worry about drinking, driving and texting or having to pick-up your kids or family. Self-driving cars are an amazing promise that will profoundly impact our lives.

Closing Remarks

There is a lot of stuff regarding self-driving cars I am skipping, or not reviewing here. I have even not scratched the surface on ethics. Also, I am aware of the fact that I am not a lawyer or city planner, and that I am stepping outside of my boundaries as engineer. Disclaimer there. I am aware there are still legal issues to resolve and transforming a city will not happen overnight. Far from it.

Nevertheless I am interested to hear your opinion on the matter. I believe the biggest elephant in the room might be the “Jordan Paradox”, where an increase of efficiency is followed by an increase of consumption. In other words; some believe self-driving cars might lead to more cars on the road and congestion. Of course, this depends on what kind of economic model and assumptions you take. What do you think? What do you feel is missing? Let me know in the comments.