Category: Cars

The gasoline car is one of the primary ways of transportation for millions across the globe alongside busses, bicycles, etc. and, although there is a more efficient, cheaper, and “cleaner” option available, the electric car, many cannot reap the benefits of owning one due to their lack of knowledge. [Depending on different variables including the price of gas in your area and commuting distance, this may change.] Electric/hybrid vehicles, like the Toyota Prius, have recently changed the face of the automobile industry as sales have steadily increased every year. Electric vehicles are breaking the barriers created by the oil industry and those who would not benefit from the electric vehicle revolution, like gas stations through years of research and commitment from various companies, most of who believe in bettering the Earth’s environment with their creations.

The first major breakthrough for hybrid cars was in 1997, when the Toyota Prius, the first widely sold hybrid car was introduced to Japan. The idea of creating a new type of car began in the summer of 1993 when then honorary chairman Eiji Toyoda advised executives and employees to, “start thinking about a new vision for cars, one for the medium and long term that would prepare us for the 21st century.” [FNT1] Toyoda was concerned because gas prices had become half the cost it was in 1981 and had become “king” once again. Toyoda also recognized that gasoline was not a renewable source. He did not want to wait until prices raised again and proposed that the company create a new car that used much less gas and had better mileage; other executives agreed. Then Chairman Shoichiro Toyoda concurred with the plan to develop a new vision for cars fit for the new century and even lent his support to the project. Yoshiro Kimbara, vice-president in charge of research and development started the project that September under the code name G21 with the “G” representing the globe and the “21” standing for the upcoming century. Eiji Toyoda’s advice had become the new goal for the G21 team made up of 10 engineers and designers. Satoshi Ogiso, the only person to have worked on the Prius from the project planning stage all the way to the present fourth generation and the eventual chief powertrain engineer of G21 stated that with the idea of creating a next-generation mass production passenger car, “One of the initial challenges was how to define this vague concept of a car for the 21st century.” [FNT1] He also states, ‘We couldn’t rely on conventional methods, and since we couldn’t adopt a market-oriented approach, we decided to propose a whole new technology.’ Thus, the technology that would eventually bloom into the explosively popular Pruis was born due to this new type of thinking. By the end of 1993, the team had completed the basic concept for the 21st-century car; a long wheelbase, roomy but still compact, and a fuel efficiency of 20 kilometers per liter. [Approximately 47 miles per gallon] [calc. Wbste] With this idea approved by higher-ups, the initial team disbanded.

The G21 project was resumed soon after under a new structure that was led by now Chairman Takeshi Uchiyamada, but then a member of the Technical Administration Division. The new decree was to advance the research that was going to be used for the 21st-century car as a full-time undertaking. Uchiyamada’s own father had been a Toyota engineer and had assisted in the designing of the Toyota Crown. Since young, Uchiyamada had desired to design a car just like his father. The chance presented itself through the G21 project, so he passionately set to work. The official launch date for G21 was on February 1, 1994. Chassis, body, engine, and driveline engineers joined the project along with production engineering staff. Kimbara, the same man that helped to launch G21’s initial team went to Toyota’s engineers and expressed that he wanted the new car to be able to achieve at least 48 miles per gallon. [77.2 kilometers] [calc. Wbste] But, at the time, the company’s most fuel-efficient car was the Toyota Corolla. Toyota almost specialized in making these types of cars, and it was considered to be one of the best in the world. The 1993 Corolla could get 24 miles per gallon in a city environment, and executives were asking that engineers design a car that could get twice that number. This would make the new car twice as efficient as any car that they had ever made before. Uchiyamada started and quickly came up with his first design that contained a gas engine. He did not base it on the initial team’s design but estimated that it could drive 47.5 miles per gallon. [76.4 kilometres] [calc. Wbste] He had met the requirement that the executives had asked of him, to improve the fuel efficiency by 50%, but they were not satisfied. Executives desired a more modern, unique car, one that buyers would be awed by and companies would have a hard time copying. The G21 engineers are set to work once again.

They started to relook at the fundamental question, “What is a car that would be fit for the 21st century?” The discussion that took place revolved around the environment, energy conservation, and safety. In 1993 the company was already very advanced regarding technological safety. Project members mutually agreed that it was now time to face growing issues including energy resources, climate change, and increasing air pollution. The keywords describing G21 would later become “resources” and “environment”. Eventually, the initial team’s idea of a compact car with a wide interior and outstanding fuel efficiency resurfaced as the main development concept. Ogiso states,

“We thought about what kind of a car would match our concept from every angle possible. Would it be an ultra-compact car seating one or two people, or a large car with great fuel efficiency that could have greater benefit for the environment as a whole? In the midst of those discussions, we also considered the powertrain.” [FNT1]

In the early 1990s, a period occurred where many car makers across the globe strived to create a next-generation powertrain as the promising hybrid car started to emerge. However, at this stage, the G21 team did not consider a hybrid system that was powered by an electric motor to be possible. It was a hot topic among many in the industry but the technology had not yet been proven to be successful. Eventually, the G21 members agreed to use a direct-injection engine with an exceptionally efficient automatic transmission. This would raise fuel efficiency by 1.5 times any other car in a similar class.

Then, unexpectedly, the project took a major turn in November of 1994 when Akihiro Waka, the executive vice president for technology, sent a command to Uchiyamada asking that the G21 team create the next-generation car a hybrid. He made it clear that if this task could not be completed, then the whole project itself would be axed. Ogiso notes that at first, they were only told to create a hybrid version of the next-generation car as a concept for an upcoming motor show. But voices supporting the idea of making the new car a hybrid gradually grew in volume. At the time, project leader Uchiyamada believed that the idea of developing a production hybrid before the 21st century was not achievable. Uchiyamada now recalls, “At the moment, I felt he demanded too much.” [book] Despite the doubt expressed by G21, a consensus that it would be practically meaningless to debut the 21st-century car with a 20th-century powertrain grew throughout the company. Suddenly, the project was faced with a towering wall regarding development.

Thorough studies on new hybrid systems were started at the end of 1994 until early 1995 due to the fact that there was no system proven to flawlessly work. The team’s best option was to experiment and choose the system proven to be best. After testing, it was decided that the two-motor type would be implemented for its potentially high fuel efficiency and the promise that power electronics would make leaps and bounds in the near future. It was even believed that conventional transmission could be completely eliminated. This system would later become known as the Toyota Hybrid System. [THS] It had two motors with an engine. The first would boost engine output and the second generate electricity, among other things. The team simultaneously worked on the concept car for the upcoming Tokyo Motor Show while trying to develop their production car. The concept car had an estimated fuel efficiency of 30 kilometers per liter, a single motor, a direct-injection engine, a CTV, and a capacitor instead of batteries. G21 Engineer Ogisio states,

“Technically, it was a hybrid, but we called it the Toyota Energy Management System, or EMS, instead. We had already decided to use two motors for the new hybrid system, so we wanted to clearly differentiate the two cars.” FNT1

With this concept, they gained permission to move forward with the production car during a meeting in June 1995. Their first steps would be to create a prototype with the correct engine and develop new motors, alongside batteries. One of the biggest first steps taken was partnering with Matsushita Battery Industrial Co. Ltd., to create the battery system, a company that Toyota had previously collaborated with for electric vehicle research. Engineers working on the Prius at the time say that making the prototype was like working off of a completely blank slate and was a challenge for them because they had to assemble all basic parts and test them, which was time-consuming.

Time was starting to become of the essence as the G21 team worked to finalize the prototype production hybrid. The Tokyo Motor Show, where EMS was showcased gained a little reaction from the general public, but keen, interested looks from other companies. During the month November 1995, the car was finally assembled, but not able to run. The team had a tough time initially finding the cause of various malfunctions and had to use analog testers and analyzed digital signals to solve each individual problem; worse new issues began to arise. Even after successful testing on the test bench, when installed, many components still failed mainly due to the complexity of the THS drive system. ‘It took us 49 days to get the prototype operating,’ says Ogiso. ‘Even then, the driving was awkward and inconsistent. After 500 meters, it just stopped altogether.” FNT1 G21 had successfully gotten the car to run before the end of the year but still needed to achieve double the fuel efficiency of a conventional car, improve drivability, and ensure durability. Their sales and production target set by 1998 meant that they would have to increase the development speed even more, and the prototype was still far from production. Time was already ticking, so the decision made by the management team to move forward the aimed launch date by a year to 1997 astounded the team.

The third Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, (COP3) a convention revolving around the environment was due to be held in Kyoto in December of 1997. It was then that management released news of the Prius to the world not only because of the media attention that it would garner, being a hybrid car during this type of convention, but because the Prius also represented a perfect solution for the need of a dramatic reduction in CO2 emissions. Another factor for its early release, perhaps even more significant, was that other major carmakers were also starting to develop their own electrified cars. Many more hybrids involving R&D were being showcased at various motor shows, and G21 engineers were already aware of the danger that they were in. They had witnessed many examples of car manufacturers falling victim to rivaling companies after missing narrow windows of opportunity to spread publicity about their product, even while rushing. But taking their recent prototype and turning it into a real production car in a measly two years would be no easy task.

There was still a mountain of problems that needed to be solved. To name a few, the current hybrid system frequently charged and discharged, and the team had not figured out a solution that prevented the memory effect from shortening the battery’s lifespan. But batteries were not the only major issue with the car. During bench tests, the car would come to a halt if temperatures got too cold [below 14 degrees Fahrenheit, or -10 degrees Celsius] regularly overheat, and cause explosions. The prototypes didn’t have very good fuel efficiency either; it was worse than a standard Corolla. Eventually, the problems were mended but there was not a sure path paved.

The team was unsure how to complete this task in two years, and turned to a method called simultaneous engineering [SE] to hasten the process. SE would solve many issues at the same time because of the collaboration with different production engineering divisions to ready the car for mass production, though it was at a stage where it wasn’t even operating properly.

In March 1996 talented veteran engineer Takehisa Yaegashi was made the new leader of the hybrid system team. Regenerative braking was added to the car along with other unique features. Amongst the team’s anxiety caused by the time frame, the company fearlessly announced at a media briefing for THS at a hotel in Akasaka, Tokyo on March 25, 1997, that a hybrid system had successfully been developed as an answer to environmental problems that the 21st century would face. Press releases promised double the fuel efficiency of conventional cars and the new model to be shown within the year. No specific figures were released by the company yet reports claimed that prices would be approximately ¥500,000 more than the Corolla. [Approximately ¥2.15 million/$21,500] At the time the car could not travel 28 kilometers per liter, but G21 could not announce that this was not attainable. The launch was set to be in December 1997 and development was not looking bright, but now that it was announced to the public, everyone knew that there was no turning back.

By August 1997 testing was nearly complete and a line at the Takaoka Plant started producing prototypes in September. The first press conference to unveil the Prius was on October 14, 1997, at a hotel in Roppongi, Tokyo, and auto journalists and the general media were there. Their promise was met; 28 kilometers per liter was achieved under the Japanese 10-15 test cycle and under the reported price tag announced by the media in March. But would the car sell? Toyota executive Katsuaki Watanabe recollects, “I did not envisage… a major success at the time. Some thought it would grow rapidly, and others thought it would grow gradually. I was in the second camp.” [book] The announcement sparked global interest from environmentalists and at the Tokyo Motor Show on October 22, masses of people came to get a glimpse of the new car whose catchphrase was “Just in time for the 21st century” emphasizing its position. The Prius sold well in Japan and owners seemed to be proud to own a “green” car. The Prius was named Japan’s car of the year in 1997 and the G21 project was viewed as an astounding success throughout the country. But sales in China and Europe had not done as well.

It was decided that the next release was to be in the United States, of California due to their strict air pollution laws and raising gas prices. Although the Honda Insight a “mild hybrid” was released there almost seven months prior, many celebrities including Leonardo DiCaprio and Harrison Ford drove the Prius garnering interest from American consumers. Toyota executives changed their minds about the car that was supposed to lose money for years. In contrast, Jim Press, President of Toyota’s US division stated, “It’s the hottest car we’ve ever had.” [book] Though Toyoda was initially wary about releasing a second-generation car, the positive reaction from both Japan and the United States confirmed it. Ogisio states, “The second generation represented the next evolution of the hybrid system, improving both fuel efficiency and drivability, and succeeded in further raising the Prius’s presence in the global market.’ [FNT1]

By 2015 the fourth-generation Prius was released having a fuel efficiency of more than 40 kilometers per liter. Half of the cars sold in Japan by Toyota are now hybrid cars, and by early 2017 cumulative Toyota hybrid car sales had exceeded 10 million units. The car is now looked at as a pioneer and has carved the path for many new cars/companies today.

The Prius has left a big impact and lasting legacy. Big, new, and old companies such as Tesla, Rivian, Ford, Chevy, and Honda to name a few have all taken their own approach to the electric car, slowly breaking the barrier of the widely used gasoline car. Different companies have targeted different demographics like Ford, who has announced progress on creating an electric F-150, the “#1 selling truck in America.” and Tesla who has implemented a large screen and various gadgets/features to entertain presumably the millennial generation. Electric cars are becoming more popular because of this and sales have steadily increased in recent years, helping the environment. Technology has and always will continue to advance.

INTRODUCTION

Autonomous vehicles also known as self-driving cars are highly popular around the world to advance smart mobility and sustainable cities (Lim and Taeihagh, 2019). However, at some point in the near future when something has gone wrong on the road, it has to choose between two options to make a maneuver of whether to save the passenger inside the car while putting the pedestrians at risk or to save pedestrians on the road and put its own passengers at risk. How this decision make by AV depends on how it is programmed to work, in other words what ethical choice its software tells it to make (Ackerman, 2020). AVs would already be in the market if there were clear ethical rules to follow when confronted with such situation (Ackerman, 2020). Nevertheless, there are endless numbers of possible ethical problems and within that the most ethical course of action vary from person to person (Ackerman, 2020). Defining the algorithms of AVs that will help make the moral decisions is still a tough challenge (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016).

BACKGROUND ANALYSIS

AVs got the potential to offer improved safety, congestion traffic efficiency, reducing carbon-dioxide emission, and eliminating most of the traffic accidents. Yet not all the accidents are avoidable by AVs, there will be some crashes where it requires AVs to make difficult ethical decision that cause unavoidable harm (Martin et al., 2017). For example, it can save the pedestrians by swerving and sacrificing its own passengers or save its own passengers and kill several pedestrians.Besides, even if these situations never occur, AVs programming still need ethical rules on what decision to make when face with such hypothetical situations (Li et al., 2018). Therefore, these types of decisions must be made before it is released for a global commodity (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016). Algorithms form the basis of decision making in AVs, allowing them to perform driving task autonomously (Lim and Taeihagh, 2019). These algorithms that control AVs need to implant moral principles directing their decisions in situation of inevitable harm (McManus and Rutchick, 2018).[image: ]

To understand how people, feel about the potential for AVs to make ethical decisions, Jean-Francois Bonnefon, Azim Shariff, and Iyad Rahwan conducted six online surveys with a total number of 1928 of participants between June and November 2015 (Ackerman, 2020). They notice a possible concern with MTurk studies, that some participants may already be familiar with testing materials as these materials are used by many research groups. Therefore, they made their own testing materials which have never been used in a published MTurk study (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016). In study one with 182 participants, 76% believed that it would be more moral for AVs to sacrifice one passenger rather than kill ten pedestrians. They also strongly expressed a moral preference for utilitarian AVs programmed to minimise the number of casualties (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016). In study two, participants were introduced with dilemmas that varied the number of pedestrians’ lives. Participants moral approval increased with the number of lives that could be saved and even strong to the treatments in which they had to imagine themselves or a family member (Li et al., 2018). While in study three, participants were presented with social dilemma and asked to specify how likely they would buy an AVs with less casualties, meaning sacrificing themselves or a co-rider under unavoidable circumstances. As well as, how likely they would buy an AVs which is programmed to prioritise its own passengers under all circumstances (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016).

Although the likelihood of buying an AV even for self-protective option was low as per the report, participants demonstrated a more lower likelihood of getting an AV when they think of their family member or they would be sacrificed for a greater good (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016). On the other hand, participants think that utilitarian AVs were most moral and welcome them on the road, but they would not prefer to buy one for themselves (Ackerman, 2020). In study four, participants were given 100 points to assign between different types of algorithms to indicate firstly how normal the algorithms were, secondly how aggregable participants were in order for AVs to programmed in a given manner, and thirdly how likely participants were to buy an AV programmed in a given manner (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016). Once again, participants approved utilitarian, self-sacrificing AVs but will not buy for themselves (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016). In study five, participants were asked about their attitudes towards legally implementing utilitarian sacrifices and as normal the perceived morality of the sacrifice was high (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016). In the last study, participants were asked about their likelihood of buying an AV whose algorithms have been maintained by the government (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016). Participants were hesitant to accept the governmental regulations of utilitarian AVs (Ackerman, 2020). Overall, participants were less likely to buy an AV with such regulation than without (Ackerman, 2020).

Consequently, it is not only passengers of AVs who got a say in what is ethically right way for an AV to be programmed and behave. At the same time, the manufacturers who program the AVs and the government, which may regulate the kind of programming manufacturers can offer (McManus and Rutchick, 2018). As per the survey findings, people tend to believe that everyone would be better off with an utilitarian AVs with less causalities on the road, but also the same people have personal motive to travel in AVs that will protect them under all costs (Faulhaber et al., 2018). While this create a social dilemma, if both the utilitarian AVs and self-protective AVs were presented on the market, more people would be willing to ride in self-protective AVs rather than in utilitarian AVs (Bonnefon, Shariff and Rahwan, 2016). In addition, regulators may face with difficulties of whether to enforce utilitarian AVs which most people disapprove. Or to delay the approval of AVs which indicate that the lives saved by making utilitarian AVs may exceed the number of deaths caused by delaying the approval of AVs (McManus and Rutchick, 2018).

LEGAL RESOURCE AVAILABLE IN AUSTRALIA

Whereas in Australia, NTC (National Transport Council) an intergovernmental agency was tasked with leading a number of reforms to the regulation of autonomous vehicles, specially in relation to legal and safety issues by the Transport and Infrastructure Council in November 2016 (Preparing for Automated Vehicles, 2020). Subsequently, the Transport and Infrastructure Council came to agree some of the actions which include, to develop national enforcement guidelines that clarify regulatory concepts of control and proper control for different levels of driving automation (Preparing for Automated Vehicles, 2020). Develop options to manage government access to autonomous vehicle data that balances road safety and network efficiency outcomes and efficient enforcement of traffic laws with enough privacy security for autonomous vehicle users (Preparing for Automated Vehicles, 2020). Review injury insurance schemes to find any eligibility barriers for owners of an autonomous vehicle, or those involved in crash with an autonomous vehicle (Preparing for Automated Vehicles, 2020). Develop legislative reform options to clarify the application of current driver and driving laws to autonomous vehicles, and to build legal obligations for autonomous driving system entities (Preparing for Automated Vehicles, 2020). The action also includes, design and develop a safety assurance scheme for autonomous road vehicles (Preparing for Automated Vehicles, 2020).

The man was leaving work exhausted after working a 15-hour day; he got into his autonomous vehicle, yearning to go home. As he began his trip home, he began to doze off every couple of minutes and it was getting dangerous to drive in these conditions. Recognizing his sleepiness, he turned on his car’s advanced autopilot feature to assure his safety. Shortly after he had activated the autopilot, unbeknownst to him, he had completely dozed off relinquishing control of the car at a busy intersection. After a while the man had begun to awaken, paralyzed by fear until he realized that he was sitting in his driveway. His car had driven him safely and prevented a tragedy for him as well as his loved ones. The topics of technological advancements in the automotive industry such as self-driving cars are very prevalent topics in society today. Self-driving cars utilize technology like high-quality cameras and ultrasonic sensors to sense the external environment around the car to provide optimal driving conditions. The technology is meant to be an assistive technology to aid in a more relaxed driving experience as well as hands-free completely relaxed driving. This raises the question: how has an improvement in self-driving technology made driving and life improved, safer, and more efficient?

Self-driving cars and the technology included with them are discussed and disputed through all echelons of society. The idea of self-driving cars is relatively new but has great support from those who own and operate one. There are many types of self-driving cars, but a single company, Tesla, has dominated the space with its line of vehicles each receiving near-perfect safety ratings, which is one of the multitudes of reasons that the manufacturing of these vehicles should be pushed. Benefits of the increased manufacturing of autonomous vehicles include a general improvement of life, improved efficiency on the road, improved safety, as well as an overall improvement in the lives of those who are disabled. State leaders as well as car manufacturers should be pushing the funding and production of self-driving cars as it would benefit the country in terms of general improvement of life, improved efficiency on the road, and improved safety.

Self-driving vehicles should be pushed for production because of the many improvements they would impose upon society, generally improving the lives of those who own them. Self-driving cars eliminate the exhaustive uphill battle in terms of exhaustive commutes, and forced areas of living as stated in the quote:

Driverless cars have the potential to completely change the way Americans think about where they live. The commute from the suburb to the city center will become much less strenuous, so people will feel less need to live in the city itself. People will no longer need to pay the high rents, taxes, and fees common in big cities in order to work comfortably in those places. With driverless cars, driving to work will feel more like sitting at home on the couch watching a favorite television show. (Whitt)

The push for self-driving cars is an important and necessary one. There is a multitude of reasons why self-driving cars are better to use than traditional gas-powered vehicles. Exhaustive commuting could lead to a higher rate of car crashes so, utilizing these autonomous vehicles could be key in preventing unnecessary deaths. Additionally, some people do not enjoy being forced to choose a location to live because of their jobs. The stressful lifestyles that come with owning a traditional vehicle would evanesce, revealing a more peaceful stress-free lifestyle of being able to get driven to and from a place of work without having to worry about exhaustion. It is truly important to push the manufacturing of these vehicles to improve the day-to-day lives of many people across the country. Traditional gas-powered vehicles

In addition to making the day-to-day lives of people easier, the mass implementation of self-driving cars would bring improved efficiency on the road. Autonomous vehicles should be thought of as a packet of data and the road acting as an ethernet cable; this will lead to the prevention of traffic congestion, on-time arrival, and efficient spacing between and around cars (Oliver). The roads of the modern world are horribly mismanaged and wildly crowded with little to no organization. With the implementation of self-driving cars, there would be less time spent trying to get from point A to point B and it would be done so in a more efficient manner. The traditional gas-powered vehicles lack the technical capabilities of modern-day self-driving cars, providing an even greater reason to implement these new and ever-improving technologies. It is vital that self-driving cars get implemented in order to fully improve the efficiency of the ever-changing world.

Pushing the increased funding and production of self-driving cars would provide increased safety. Self-driving cars offer many increased benefits in safety because of the many technologies they possess as stated in the quote: “The self-driving cars that are now being developed use many forms of technology to drive themselves. Radar, cameras, and other devices are used to ‘see’ the world around the car. Advanced computer systems drive the car from one destination to another without any help from humans” (Peters). The arguably biggest factor when it comes to purchasing a car is how reliable it is but more importantly how safe it is. The technologies utilized in self-driving cars are greater than those used in gas-powered cars and create a more safe environment for those who might be crossing the road and overall road safety. The number of deaths that come from human error would be decreased as a result of the implementation of these cars with the increased and improved technologies they possess.

Although there are many viable benefits of self-driving cars, there are still groups that believe that these vehicles are too premature and should not be utilized. Not bound to one specific brand or model of the self-driving car, it is said that these vehicles are equivalent to or less than a seven-month child and lack object permanence. It is stated, ‘Autonomous vehicles are getting better, but they still don’t understand the world in the way that a human being does. For a self-driving car, a bicycle that is momentarily hidden by a passing van is a bicycle that has ceased to exist (The Economist). Though perfectly viable, this is not taking into consideration that a situation as specific as a bike passing behind a van has an extremely low chance of happening if all traffic laws are obeyed. The suite of technologies on board various self-driving cars is meant to provide safety through multiple means and not just one that may be prone to failure.

State leaders as well as car manufacturers should be pushing the funding and production of self-driving cars as it would benefit the country in terms of general improvement of life, improved efficiency on the road, and improved safety. The new and ever-improving self-driving cars constantly add a general improvement of life for those who own one by making their lives so much easier on a day-to-day basis. Self-driving cars also offer greatly improved efficiency on the road by clearing congested roads and allowing for faster departure and arrival times. Lastly, self-driving cars offer a greater view of their surroundings that people would otherwise not be able to see or detect, preventing major accidents. If American citizens want to usher in a positive future they should push for the increase regulating and manufacturing of autonomous vehicles. There are so many companies existing and emerging within this ever-growing space of autonomy. The time has come for people to start worrying about the future more than the present and self-driving cars are the perfect starting point.

Abstract

The application of artificial intelligence technology will soon permit large-scale deployment of self-driving cars for human daily lives. Self-driving cars are assumed to be safer than manually driven cars, but car collisions are sometimes unavoidable. It’s necessary to consider during the occurrence of a car accident, the ethical algorithms for different stages of the accident, which are the responsibilities and backward-looking responsibilities. Along with interests that are held by various stakeholders, seek forward-looking dilemma is produced. In other words, there is this between technology and business. So In general, this paper mainly tradeoffs the relationship between human beings and technology. Besides, the dilemma faced by self-driving cars, possible solutions will also be discussed from both theoretical and practical aspects.

Introduction

Artificial intelligence technology has been widely known by the public along with the development of society. Meanwhile, based on efficiency and convenience, the government also discusses ethical huge capital in this industry, which further increases the rate of improvement in artificial intelligence technology. Undoubtedly, the common attitudes toward artificial intelligence invests by society as a whole held a stereotype. The most news report this industry in a positive aspect with a vision for the future. People focus more on having good technical parts of technology, arguing some failures or problems are caused by unmatured technology instead of ethical problems. By considering the current trend, artificial intelligence technology has frequently entered human’s daily lives, and many products of artificial technology gradually start to replace the role played by a human in the past such as robots and self-driving cars. Especially for cars, more and more famous companies such as Google and Uber begin to participate in the invention of self-driving cars. As announced by General Motors, autonomous vehicles will be ready for the market by 2020. With required interactions with human beings, ethical problems are unavoidable to be produced and a dilemma in some ways. Therefore, in this research paper, I will discuss the causes of lead by focusing on self-driving cars and provide possible solutions and suggestions.

The Significance of Artificial Intelligence Technology used in Self-driving Cars

Before we get into analyzing the causes of the ethical dilemma faced by autonomous vehicles, it is necessary to briefly introduce the ethical dilemmas of artificial intelligence (also known as machine learning), which is the main technology used by autonomous vehicles. At present, there are three main objectives in the field of machine learning focused on by researchers: task-oriented studies, cognitive simulation, and theoretical analysis. This trichotomy of mutually challenging and supportive objectives is a reflection of the entire field of artificial intelligence, providing cross-fertilization of problems and ideas[footnoteRef:1]. With the application of these three fields, self-driving cars could make wn their according to different scenarios by imitating human beings instead of manually driving. So some people might question why autonomous vehicles should replace manually driven cars. Are self-driving cars cars’ than normal cars? We should understand the differences between human learning and machine learning decisions and better answer why machines should learn. Firstly, we cannot deny the tediousness of human learning, which is a long and slow process. to most situations, even after people learn or understand the principles, it’s hard for them to apply these In other scenarios because the human cannot compute as fast as teaching does. On the other hand, there is no copy process during human learning; conversely, for machines, “when one computer has learned it, they’ve all learned it in principle”[footnoteRef:2]. So the distinctions between machine learning and human learning lead to the purpose of artificial intelligence. As mentioned by Herbert A. Simon, who was an American social scientist from Carnegie Mellon University, artificial intelligence has two goals. [1: Carbonell, Jaime G., Ryszard S. Michalski, and Tom M. Mitchell. ‘An Overview of Machine Learning.’ Machine Learning, 1983, 3-23.] [2: Simon, Herbert A. ‘Why Should Machines Learn?’ Machine Learning, 1983, 25-37.]

“First, AI is directed toward getting computers to be smart and do smart things so that human beings don’t have to do them. And second, AI (sometimes called cognitive simulation, or information processing psychology) is also directed at using computers to simulate human beings, so that we can find out how humans work and perhaps can help them to be a little better in their work.”[footnoteRef:3] [3: Simon, Herbert A. ‘Why Should Machines Learn?’ Machine Learning, 1983, 25-37.]

As admitted by most autonomous vehicles, improving safety through avoiding crashes could be the main reason for the introduction of self-driving cars instead of human beings. For example, Waymo, Google’s self-driving cars project, states clearly on its website, “We aim to bring fully self-driving technology to the world that can improve mobility by giving people the freedom to get around programs and save thousands of lives now lost to traffic crashes”[footnoteRef:4]. Other than this, saving time for commuting, removing barriers for disabled people, and reducing the environmental impact of driving are also the benefits brought by self-driving cars, motivating more research on this technology. [4: ‘Waymo – Waymo.’ Waymo. Accessed April 22, 2019. https://waymo.com/.]

The Causes of the Ethical Dilemma

Although autonomous vehicles have good intentions, it’s possible to have some accidents. For example, on March 18, 2018, a woman was struck and killed on Sunday night by an autonomous car operated by Uber in Tempe, Ariz. It was believed to be the first pedestrian death associated with self-driving technology. The occurrence of this real accident caused by self-driving cars reminds society that it’s time for people to pay attention to ethical perspectives to consider the relationship between human beings and artificial intelligence, and that is the topic I now return——the causes of the ethical dilemma.

Self-driving cars hold the promise to the public that they are safer than manually driven cars. Yet they cannot be perfectly safe. Car collisions are sometimes unavoidable. As said by Elon Musk, the founder of Tesla, “Perfect safety is n impossible goal.”[footnoteRef:5]. According to the high-risk rate of avoidable car accidents, there is a need to consider how self-driving cars should be programmed to react to various ethical dilemmas in different scenarios, leading to the ethical dilemma of accidents for autonomous vehicles. In accidentsResearch paper “The Ethics of Accident-Algorithms for Self-Driving Cars: an Applied Trolley Problem?” written by Sven Nyholm, he claims that “Some philosophers have recently likened accident-management in autonomous vehicles to the so-called trolley problem. Several journalists and opinion piece writers have also done so”[footnoteRef:6]. So from the philosophical aspect, the ethical dilemma faced by self-driving cars can be seen as an applied Trolley Problem. Trolley Problem is a hypothetical scenario raised by Phillipa Foot in 1967, which assumes that right before the trolley, they have been repairing the tracks, so the driver must stop the track to avoid five workers have had a collision. However, the track goes through a valley, and both sides are steep. It turns to another choice of turning the trolley on the other tract, but one workman on this track will be killed. This leads to the tradeoff between causing one death and preventing several more deaths. [5: Wilkins, Alasdair. ‘Elon Musk Explains Why Radar Is Future of Tesla’s Autopilot.’ Inverse. Accessed April 22, 2019. ] [6: Nyholm, Sven, and Jilles Smids. ‘The Ethics of Accident-Algorithms for Self-Driving Cars: An Applied Trolley Problem?’ Ethical Theory and Moral Practice19, no. 5 (2016)]

The real meaning of the trolley dilemma can be reflected in self-driving. Whether the car is controlled by humans or humans, both of them need to make choices. In reality, when the human driver experiences an extreme situation such as a person rushing in front of the car suddenly, there is no time for him to consider the choice rationally. So the reaction of the driver is machines based on subconsciousness which leads to unpredictable results. Either no one is hurt, or the sharp turn causes a rollover or a rear end. Under most situations, the human driver will not be condemned in the moral aspect by the public. However, self-driving will be completely different compared with human control. All the reactions to,self-driving cars are set in advance by people. Once extreme situations occur, the machine will give the reaction based on the designed computer program rather than making a choice. Hence, all decisions made by self-driving cars are completely rational, leading to an ethical dilemma.

There are three main stages of ethical algorithms in car accidents: before, during, and after the car accident. These three stages generate two very different decision-making situations, which could be divided into forward-looking responsibilities and backward-looking responsibilities. For forward-looking responsibilities, it concerns who should be held responsible, and what they should be held responsible for, if and when accidents occur[footnoteRef:7]. Google gives the official response that the main objective of self-driving is to reduce traffic accidents caused by human negligence. In other words, the main purpose is to keep people safe. So the target of safety when people must consider the “trolley dilemma” occurs; the self-driving car protects the safety of the people inside the car or outside. For example, a self-driving car on car can’t turn a rough mountain path, and there are few children in front of you. To avoid hitting the children, the car has to choose between left or right. However, a car can’t turn left because it will drop from the mountain, killing the driver; if the car turns right, it will collide with a car in an inverse direction and go against the traffic rules. As a result, a dilemma is formed. If the car’s priority is the safety of people outside the car, people are less likely to purchase this kind of car because of the high possibility of life-threatening circumstances to the drivers. [7: Nyholm, Sven, and Jilles Smids. ‘The Ethics of Accident-Algorithms for Self-Driving Cars: An Applied Trolley Problem?’ Ethical Theory and Moral Practice19, no. 5 (2016)]

This scenario can be viewed from another perspective by focusing on the traffic rules. If following the traffic rules is only harmful, is it permissible for self-driving cars to break the traffic rules under some special situations? Even when people change their perspective, the dilemma still cannot be avoided because it contradicts the purpose of traffic rules. In society, following traffic rules can be regarded as an agreed-upon expectation for people to decrease the possibility of leads traffic accidents. Therefore, all of these contribute to the ethical dilemma of self-driving cars in the stages before and during the accident.

Other than these two stages, an ethical dilemma also exists after the occurrence of a traffic accident. Backward-looking responsibilities concern moral and legal responsibility for how cars are to be programmed to deal with the various kinds of risky situations they might encounter in traffic[footnoteRef:8]. By using the extreme scenarios discussed above, the contribution of decision-making power and responsibility are also very important aspects that need to be thought about carefully. Once the emergency happens and someone is hurt or killed, who should be the person that takes responsibility? The car owners or the car producers? For this series of problems, the law doesn’t provide any useful information for the public to reference so far. Other than the non-existence of self-driving laws, security risks brought by the internet should be focused on. With the development of digital technology, future cars will depend more on the internet to update traffic data and upload data timely, especially for self-driving cars. Hence, it provides more chances for cyber hackers to find out the flaws to utilize these to achieve high-tech crimes. They even can control the brakes and steer remotely, bringing great security risks for the public. [8: Nyholm, Sven, and Jilles Smids. ‘The Ethics of Accident-Algorithms for Self-Driving Cars: An Applied Trolley Problem?’ Ethical Theory and Moral Practice19, no. 5 (2016)]

Possible Solutions for Ethical Dilemma

By considering the causes of the ethical dilemma faced by self-driving cars, it seems impossible to eliminate car accidents at present. Tesla’s founder Elon Musk said, “It’s really about improving the probability of safety – that’s the only thing possible”[footnoteRef:9]. Some possible solutions to the ethical dilemma are required for the public to think Asand discuss. about Toways some extent, the ethical dilemma of autonomous cars accident could be regarded as an applied Trolley problem. We could use more theoretical or abstract ways to solve the problem. In the essay “Solving the Trolley Problem,” Joshua D. Greene, an American experimental psychologist, states different perspectives to consider the Trolley dilemma from a psychological aspect, which could be utilized as a good reference for self-driving cars. Joshua claims that “The normative and descriptive Trolley Problems are closely related”[footnoteRef:10]. So based on the theory, any attempt to solve the normative ethical dilemma should begin with the attempt to solve the descriptive problems. The descriptive problem refers to introducing the content of an ethical dilemma without any value judgments. So it requires people to identify the features of actions that elicit their moral approval or disapproval[footnoteRef:11]. At this stage, it’s easy for the public to recognize that during a car accident, any choices faced by autonomous vehicles are morally disapproving, causing the existence of ethical dilemmas. Once such moral disapproval has been identified, the descriptive problem turns toward a normative question. [9: Wilkins, Alasdair. ‘Elon Musk Explains Why Radar Is Future of Tesla’s Autopilot.’ Inverse. Accessed April 22, 2019. ] [10: Greene, Joshua D. ‘Solving the Trolley Problem.’ A Companion to Experimental Philosophy, 2016, 173-89.] [11: Greene, Joshua D. ‘Solving the Trolley Problem.’ A Companion to Experimental Philosophy, 2016, 173-89.]

Different from descriptive problems, normative questions combine people’s value judgments, leading to the choices that the public makes. In this situation, different stakeholders hold various values to pursue their interests. For example, consumers would like to choose cars that have priority to protect the people who are inside the cars; while some insurance companies are more likely to protect people who don’t purchase insurance. There are two general solutions for normative problems. The first solution is that people’s judgments are sensitive reflections of moral values. At this point, people are more likely to choose choices that can maximize their interests, which is similar to the concept of utilitarianism. However, distinctive purposes are pursued by various parties, so it’s unavoidable that this theoretical solution could only satisfy a few groups of people rather than the whole society. Therefore, it turns to another solution, which emphasizes the influence of the personal force factor. During ethical dilemmas, people disapprove of intended harmful actions as a means to achieve the agent’s goal. Therefore, normative solutions, suggests the public remove personal factors to avoid making ethical choices as often as they can.

Except for psychologists, philosophers also provide possible abstract solutions by introducing two distinctive theories, which are consequentialism and deontology. Consequentialism, in ethics, is the doctrine that actions should be judged right or wrong based on their consequences. (Brian Duignan, 2009) So self-driving cars are programmed to make the best decision based on various consequences. The other one is based on deontological ethics which emphasizes the relationship between duty and morality of human actions. So self-driving cars are required to follow the rules. However, as mentioned before, the law is not completely set and cannot avoid the happening of dilemma. So the problem can only be solved at a superficial level rather than a deeper level.

Nevertheless, as self-driving cars are planned to be used in real society in the future, it is also necessary to come up with a few practical solutions other than abstract solutions. Since the appearance of an ethical dilemma is based on the happening of car accidents, one possible way to eliminate ethical dilemmas is by focusing on technical issues. In Chris Urmson and William ‘Red’ Whittaker’s research paper “Self-driving Cars and Urban Challenge,” Boss, a modified 2007 Chevy Tahoe, won the urban challenge using a combination of laser, radar, and GPS data to safely navigate a 53-mile test course among 60 other vehicles (10 autonomous and 50 human-driven)[footnoteRef:12]. To some extent, the success of Boss in the competition reflects a possible desirable future for autonomous technology; conversely, if we combine the rule for the challenge, it would be problematic in some ways. Firstly, the guideline regulates that only vehicles could remain on the course which is midsized or larger. Therefore, some interference factors such as pedestrians and bicycles are removed from the scope. Besides, the stop signs would be the only traffic control on the course, and the location of the corresponding line will be set for the autonomous cars. These regulations eliminate the other important traffic signs such as traffic lights, yield signs, and the ability for self-driving cars to read or detect them from the scope. Even more, the guidelines also allow that the roads a vehicle could drive on would be at least partially defined by Highly accurate GPS waypoints[footnoteRef:13]. Hence, this becomes the key rule that the participants could utilize to reduce the requirement of complexity for self-driving cars. At the same time, it could improve the system’s performance. All of these regulations show that the environment set by the urban challenge is far different from the actual regulations, which point out the existence of many technical issues. [12: C. Urmson and W. ‘. Whittaker, ‘Self-Driving Cars and the Urban Challenge,’ in IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 66-68, March-April 2008.] [13: C. Urmson and W. ‘. Whittaker, ‘Self-Driving Cars and the Urban Challenge,’ in IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 66-68, March-April 2008.]

Currently, all the autonomous technologies which allow self-driving cars to react to the environment around them rely on sensors that are too expansive and unwieldy for consumers. So self-driving cars could not react well to the traffic light, and they operate poorly around pedestrians. Other than these normal problems, there is an interesting point on self-driving cars using Boss as an example. As mentioned by Chris Urmson, “One of the key tenets of Boss’s software system is to never give up”[footnoteRef:14]. One specific system used by Boss is its error recovery system, which enables self-driving cars to always attempt some maneuver. The common feature of all error recovery system is it permits autonomous vehicles to attempt risky maneuvers as time progresses and generate a nonrepeating series of motion goals. This error recovery system could be considered the Boss’s key to success during the challenges; while to some degree, it largely increases the risk rate when autonomous technologies are applied to real society. All these technical issues create the possibility of the occurrence of a car accident, leading to an ethical dilemma. Therefore, it’s reasonable to believe that once the possibility of a car accident decline, the ethical dilemma will be less likely to occur. [14: C. Urmson and W. ‘. Whittaker, ‘Self-Driving Cars and the Urban Challenge,’ in IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 66-68, March-April 2008.]

In research report “Public Perceptions of Self-driving Cars: The Case of Berkeley, California” published by Howard Daniel and Danielle Dai, investigates a group of people and collects data to analyze. They present this case study to inform those creating this technology about how self-driving cars will likely be perceived by the public. It is undeniable that the public attitudes toward self-driving cars become increasingly important as the public shapes the demand and market for the cars, the policies that govern them, and future investments and infrastructure. Therefore, based on the result of the investigation, different solutions are given for two distinctive decision-making of ethical dilemmas. For the first two stages of the car accident, which need to decide the forward-looking responsibilities, people should determine and communicate the amount of control a human has in the context of the self-driving car. Besides, the regulations also need to decide the level of the freedom to make choices; meanwhile, encouraging the active involvement of stakeholders in the process of design and requirements specification. For example, Howard Daniel and Danielle Dai investigate the public envisioning the inclusion of this technology in today’s network. Based on the statistics from the report, “38% believe that self-driving cars should operate with normal traffic, 46% in separate lanes and 11% had no opinion,”[footnoteRef:15] government is required to take some actions such as separating from other modes of transportation through dedicated lanes for autonomous vehicles in some areas. Considering the backward-looking responsibilities, the blank of legislation needs to be fixed by the government to take some actions. More specifically, legislative support and contribution to global frameworks ensure smooth ratification of emerging technology. In addition, car producers should support and collaborate with legislators in their task to keep up-to-date with the current level of automated driving. For autonomous vehicle industry, it needs to include ethics in the overall process of design, development, implementation of self-driving cars, and implementation of ethics training for involved engineers. At last, establishing and maintaining a functioning socio-technological system in addition to functional safety standards would be very significant as well. [15: Howard, Daniel, and Danielle Dai. ‘Public Perceptions of Self-driving Cars: The Case of Berkeley, California.’ August 1, 2013.]

Conclusion

As this new technology is being tested and gradually allowed on the roads under controlled conditions, the focus should be on the practical technological solutions and their social consequences, rather than on idealized unsolvable problems such as the much-discussed trolley problem. What’s more, the border between what is technically possible about what is ethically justifiable exists in real society. So companies and governments need to consider carefully the tradeoff between business needs and ethics. In other words, ethical aspects should be considered in every phase of a software development process by enforcing transparency in those processes. Finally, the public should enable a serious discussion of ethics and should emphasize interests to make sure that the freedom of choice does not disappear in the new era of artificial intelligence technology.

The current self-driving technology is still in the experimental stage, and it faces many problems. However, with the development of technology, many problems will be solved, and driverless cars will become an inevitable trend. Until now, the ethical dilemma of self-driving cars cannot be well solved based on these ideal theories. So from my perspective, as suggested before, people should pay more attention to the actual situation, focusing on the contribution of responsibility at first and trying their best to achieve a consensus among the public. That is the best solution in the present period for the dilemma.

Bibliography

1. Carbonell, Jaime G., Ryszard S. Michalski, and Tom M. Mitchell. ‘An Overview of Machine Learning.’ Machine Learning, 1983, 3-23. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-12405-5_1.
2. Simon, Herbert A. ‘Why Should Machines Learn?’ Machine Learning, 1983, 25-37. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-12405-5_2.
3. Howard, Daniel, and Danielle Dai. ‘Public Perceptions of Self-driving Cars: The Case of Berkeley, California.’ August 1, 2013. https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~djhoward/reports/Report – Public Perceptions of Self-Driving Cars.pdf.
4. C. Urmson and W. ‘. Whittaker, ‘Self-Driving Cars and the Urban Challenge,’ in IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 66-68, March-April 2008. doi: 10.1109/MIS.2008.34
5. Nyholm, Sven, and Jilles Smids. ‘The Ethics of Accident-Algorithms for Self-Driving Cars: An Applied Trolley Problem?’ Ethical Theory and Moral Practice19, no. 5 (2016): 1275-289. doi:10.1007/s10677-016-9745-2.
6. Greene, Joshua D. ‘Solving the Trolley Problem.’ A Companion to Experimental Philosophy, 2016, 173-89. doi:10.1002/9781118661666.ch11.
7. Mladenovic, Milos N., and Tristram Mcpherson. ‘Engineering Social Justice into Traffic Control for Self-Driving Vehicles?’ Science and Engineering Ethics22, no. 4 (2015): 1131-149. doi:10.1007/s11948-015-9690-9.
8. Stilgoe, Jack. ‘Machine Learning, Social Learning and the Governance of Self-Driving Cars.’ SSRN Electronic Journal, 2017. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2937316.
9. Bimbraw, Keshav. ‘Autonomous Cars: Past, Present, and Future – A Review of the Developments in the Last Century, the Present Scenario and the Expected Future of Autonomous Vehicle Technology.’ Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics, 2015. doi:10.5220/0005540501910198.
10. Wilkins, Alasdair. ‘Elon Musk Explains Why Radar Is Future of Tesla’s Autopilot.’ Inverse. Accessed April 22, 2019. https://www.inverse.com/article/20833-elon-musk-radar-autopilot.
11. ‘Waymo – Waymo.’ Waymo. Accessed April 22, 2019. https://waymo.com/.

In 10 years, it is believed that the electric car will slowly start to push the gasoline/petrol vehicle to the curb, and it will do it with style and class. Electric cars are very beneficial, and it is very helpful to the environment Electric cars will lessen the use of gasoline. Electric Cars Are Going to Be the Future Nearly every household in America owns a gas-powered vehicle, which pollutes our environment daily. The world is changing quickly, and what looked like a science-fiction fantasy is gradually becoming our current reality. It seems that progress spreads to all spheres of humanity’s life, but one of the most amazing breakthroughs has been achieved in energy recently. Our society needs to consider furthering its knowledge and use of electric cars. Pollution of our environment must come to a halt in every situation possible to save the future of our atmosphere. I believe that the switch from gas-powered cars to electric cars is a very necessary and reasonable approach to saving the environment.

The ozone layer helps to protect life on earth from the sun’s ultraviolet rays, but human activities have contributed to the accelerated depletion of this protective shield. Vehicle emissions can affect the environment in several ways. Cars emit greenhouse gasses, such as carbon dioxide, which contribute to global warming as this carbon dioxide ruins our ozone layer. From the article (The Coming of Intelligent Green Vehicles.) ‘Today, intelligent, green vehicles are driving the future of transportation. The looming energy and environmental Mega Crisis have carmakers scrambling to raise fuel economy and develop commercially viable vehicles that limit pollutants.’ Nationwide, Electric Vehicles charged from the electricity grid produce lower global warming emissions than the average compact gasoline-powered vehicle (with a fuel economy of 27 miles per gallon)—even when the electricity is produced primarily from coal in regions with the “dirtiest” electricity grids. When the gas is burned in the engine of the car, several byproducts result. These exhausts include hydrocarbons and oxides of three elements: Carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur (Emissions). Tiny amounts of poisonous trace elements such as lead, cadmium, and nickel also are present. Everything contained in the exhaust affects the environment intensely. According to James Kliesh from Mother Earth news, Electric car emissions depend on multiple factors – particularly how your electricity is generated, which, for most, depends on where you live. Smog-forming pollution at the power plant from the use of an electric car can have higher emissions rates than typical gas-only or hybrid cars (such as die Toyota Prius), a fact owed largely to the effectiveness of catalytic converters in today’s gas cars. It’s important to note, though, that from a health standpoint, one major advantage of ‘moving’ pollution from the tailpipe to the power plant is that it gets pollutants farther away from pedestrians and other drivers, lowering the pollutants’ adverse impacts on the concentrated population.

Recently, we have noticed an increase in gas prices. I spend $35 to fill up my tank and I at least spend $60 per week, and $240 per month a total of $2,880 every year. At the same time, Global fossil fuel consumption is on the rise, and new reserves are becoming harder to find. Those that are discovered are significantly smaller than the ones that have been found in the past. If we increase gas production to fill the energy gap left by oil, our known gas reserves only give us just 52 years left. “In contrast, electric vehicles are far more efficient than conventional cars. The motors of EVs exceed 90 percent efficiency, and their batteries are better than 85 percent efficient. In addition, some EVs have regenerative braking that can recapture as much as 30 percent of the vehicle’s kinetic energy to recharge the battery. Because they have fewer parts and are so much more efficient, EVs cost much less to operate.” (Bill Moore). Driving an electric car has a lot of advantages and one of the reasons why It’s better to switch to electric cars is that you will not need gas. An electric motor is incredibly simple to operate In contrast, internal combustion engines can be made up of hundreds of parts–even thousands, in particularly advanced engines. That’s why it’s perhaps unsurprising to hear that new research suggests electric cars could cost 35 percent less to maintain than their combustion counterparts. In the article (Mother Earth News) it stated that “Electric cars consume no gasoline at all, they are a great option for drivers concerned with energy security and our nation’s oil dependence. They offer the convenience of being able to ‘refuel’ a vehicle at home, and they’re more efficient and is less expensive to operate compared with gas-only cars”

Having an electric car is cheaper to maintain not just because of not using gas but also because battery technology continues to improve, the equivalent cost per mile for driving electric vehicles is significantly less expensive than driving gasoline-based vehicles. Your average electric car can go approximately 100 miles per 30 kilowatt-hours of electricity. Assuming that you can buy 1 kWh of electricity for $0.12, this means that you can travel about 36 miles for $1.00. In terms of gasoline-powered vehicles, your average car with a fuel efficiency of 22 miles per gallon will only be able to travel about 18 miles for that same $1.00 in costs. Essentially, by driving an electric car you can get double the mileage for your dollar. You would also not be needing to get an oil change. Electric cars do not require an oil change because it does not use oil in the engine to run. Same for fan belts, air filters, spark plugs, or any other parts that need an occasional replacement for a gasoline car.

Another factor that people need to be aware of on how it is better to switch to Electric Cars is that it is better for your health. The health risks of air pollution are extremely serious. Poor air quality increases respiratory ailments like asthma and bronchitis, heightens the risk of life-threatening conditions like cancer, and burdens our healthcare system with substantial medical costs. According to Martin Khor of Inter Press News Paper: “Air pollution has emerged as a leading cause of deaths and serious ailments in the world. Emissions that cause air pollution and Greenhouse Gases are also the main factor causing climate change.” Air pollutants emitted from cars are believed to cause cancer and contribute to such problems as heart disease, asthma, eye irritation, and birth defects. Having an electric car is better for the air. We can consume better air. Reduced harmful exhaust emissions are good news for our health. Better air quality will lead to fewer health problems and costs caused by air pollution. EVs are also quieter than petrol/diesel vehicles, which means less noise pollution. Automobiles make a major contribution to air and noise pollution, the depletion of fossil fuels, and the abnormalities in children and adults due to lead poisoning. Air pollution is a serious problem that not only affects the environment but also your health. Even if we stay indoors, we are surrounded by air pollutants coming from different sources. The air that we breathe is contaminated with several pollutants. Indoor air pollutants such as molds, pollens, and cigarette smoke, as well as household products like paint, and pesticides, contaminate the indoor air. If we switch to EVs I believe that we will help make the air, we breathe cleaner and safer.

Our society needs to consider furthering its knowledge and use of electric cars. Pollution of our environment must come to a halt in every situation possible to save the future of our atmosphere. I believe that the switch from gas-powered cars to electric cars is a very necessary and reasonable approach to saving the environment.

Transitioning our transportation sector from its near sole dependence on oil to electricity can lead to big reductions in carbon pollution along with improvements in air quality. Meeting long-range climate targets also require that we continue to clean up the electric sector. We can, and should, electrify transportation and further clean up the electric sector in parallel. Turning over the fleets of cars, trucks, and power plants to cleaner energy sources will take time and we should resolve to make sure it happens.

“We see automated mobility as a service”(Jon Walker).

Self-driving cars? doesn’t seem impossible to drive a car without human beings but it is not. Self-driving cars are those cars that sense the environment and don’t need humans to get operated. Humans don’t take part in driving. An individual doesn’t need to sit in the car or control the car.

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

These cars are very helpful and work properly without even the presence of drivers. (SAE) The society of Automotive Engineers introduced 6 levels of driving in an automatic car. These levels are approved by the Transportation Department of the U.S. government. Self-driving cars can drive in all situations. Self-driving cars are on Level 3.

‘People are now paying for robot rides.

According to reports, self-driving cars can increase the economy of the globe by $7 trillion and they will save thousands of lives in the next decades. Some people will get benefit from these cars but some will face loss. Taxi drivers, transporter, and gas stations will face losses. In the initial days of self-driving cars, people called it “horseless carriage”. First, ever driverless cars were in the Air Force base that was outside Los Angeles. In 2009 Google launched its driverless car with the help of the team DARPA challenge. These cars were tested on the toughest roads of California without human involvement. After that Elon Musk announced that the self-driving system will be introduced in Tesla.

“If you have a fully autonomous car that talks to other cars and traffic signals, then it can drive more smoothly, much better than a human can and there will be fuel economy benefits coming out of that (Dave McCreadie), Ford Motor’s general manager of electric vehicle infrastructure and smart grid.

In 2015 many scientists started working on this project. Companies like Mercedes, Tesla, Nissan, General Motors, and Ford invested billions to improve the quality of their self-driving cars. Every company claimed about the improved system of radar, lidars, cameras, Maps, and data management.

“The question remains if the assumptions are correct. First, we have to develop the technology, and once we can prove that it works, then we will study how to use this technology to accomplish efficiency”.

How did they work?

Self-driving cars use hardware and software to drive on the roads without any input from human beings. The role of hardware is to collect data and then send it to software that compiles and organizes the data. In a software system, through a machine learning algorithm and complex lines of code, the input data is processed. The complex lines of code are trained in real-world scenarios. The center of self-driving cars is machine learning technology. The algorithm of data processing is getting bigger with time. This system is having goals and it does the work very efficiently. The technologies used in these cars are highly advanced because companies can’t risk the lives of their customers. The hardware is almost the same in these cars but the software changes with time. The companies update their software for better results.

‘People are always driving somewhat inefficiently because they are constantly pushing the accelerator pedal and then backing off. People usually break more rapidly than would be optimal’, says Dave McCreadie Ford Motor’s general manager.

Camera: Cameras are one of the major tools used in these cars. Elon Musk has claimed that cameras are the only sensor technologies in those cars. The algorithm should be strong enough to comprehend the images taken from these cameras. These images are very important to drive these cars. Companies are working to convert these images into 3D actionable data. Most self-driving cars work on the system of Tesla. Tesla is having 8 external-facing cameras for all the images that are used as input.

“It should be like the Internet, where everybody wants to be able to do this”.

Radars: In all self-driving cars, radars and lidars are used. Radar can detect weather conditions and can propagate through rain and snow.

“My goal is for General Motors to lead in safe autonomous driving”.

Lidar: Lidars are used to shoot out light and create 3D maps of the surrounding areas. It is placed at the top of the car and it spins.

The self-driving cars use GPS tracking inertial sensors and ultrasonic sensors to get complete pictures of the activity of the car. All self-driving cars need computers for the operating system. Ordinary CPUs are not used in these cars. They use GPUs and Graphical ProcessingUnits.Tesla is having NNA, a neural network accelerator chip. These chips have extreme power of processing and handle real-time processing.

“You can sign up for mobile service and get a pickup truck for going to the hardware store, an SUV for going to the mountains, and a cozy one for going to work. By 2030, not many people will own any cars at home”.

Future of Self-driving cars:

Due to human errors, 93% of car accidents occur. Most people don’t approve of self-driving cars because they feel that these cars are dangerous but it is not true. These cars are safer than normal cars.

“The impacts if you look into full vehicle automation could be huge (Jeff Gonder).

These cars are revolutionizing the travel infrastructure. Fully tested cars are very helpful for human development. The levels of these cars are still in the testing phase. Level 2 cars are common on roads and companies are still working on other levels. In the next few decades, self-driving cars will be common on roads and it will increase the economy globally.

“Scientists use simulation and a lot of assumptions in their models to predict what the savings would be”, Maarten Seirhuis, director of the Nissan Research Center in Silicon Valley.

Environmental impact of Self-driving cars:

“These cars are eco-made”.

The transport system is the second-largest source of pollution and greenhouse gas emissions in the USA. 27% of harmful cars and vehicles. 2 billion barrels of oil are used in the USA per year for transportation. Self-driving cars, there are many benefits for the environment. The emission of carbon gases will be reduced, and the use of oil will be less.

The owners of self-driving cars predicted that by 2040 they will launch 75 percent of vehicles on road. Self-driving cars can take better decisions than humans. This will avoid accidents and save human lives. Self-driving cars are better in acceleration and brakes. These cars are quick and excess driving is reduced. Companies communicate regarding this project with each other.

“You need enough critical mass and market impetus for these companies to share open data”(Jon Walker), manager of the transportation group at the Rocky Mountain Institute.

“When you look at the trajectory of autonomous vehicles, I think you can look at the trajectory of other industries whether it’s aviation, I think is a really good one to look at, and you’ll see there’s always an evolution as the technology gets better and better”.

“Amazon is serious about delivering its goods by an autonomous air force”(Steven Levy).

To sum up, everything that has been stated, self-driving cars are not acceptable for some of the people in our society but still we cannot ignore the fact that these cars are very helpful for mankind. The use of these cars can reduce the rate of accidents and it also reduces global warming. It is giving economical benefit to the world by saving fuel. Still, so much work is needed to update the system of these cars because we have only a few companies who are making these cars we need more companies to make these cars for the benefit of mankind.

When many races buy a car, they come into the process naked. While this is certainly appealing, it essentially mode they are given the duration to clutch the car they own hostage. When it comes to purchasing a car, whether new or pre-owned, you need to flesh neat-cattle up on your transaction skills. In this mode you will be offered more incentives, lower sticker prices, and more sweeps to treat! So make sure you NEVER pay sticker cost for your carriage and if you can’t higgle, get someone to do it for you.

Whenever shopping for a used car, it would be rational to go with certified pre-owned vehicles as this greatly reduces the probability that you’ll end up with a car that is in a straitened predicament. How much do you have to dispose of? For example, a carriage that costs more but gets better mileage may be cheaper than a lengthy run than a less-high-priced car with straitened firing serviceable husbandry. Conclude whether you want a used car or a new one. You should also hold resale value and assurance premiums in your calculations. What do you want out of your new car? Even if the salesman is very affectionate, it is just craft. If buying used, ask the trader to let you take the car to an operative. Many of the perks a trader offers are high-priced, including hydrated peroxide of iron-proofing, represent sealant, and anti-pilfering devices.

There are many certified used cars now that have been found to affect well and take away from really less than new cars do. What gas mileage are you looking for? Startle out with a not-soft form and do not allow yourself to be moved by anything the salesman says. Come near that car lot with reliance as you know you have the warning needed to be lucky. The car may be your diurnal driver, but it may not have enough leg sweep for others in your family. Shopping around is always material, and this is especially genuine when it comes to the construction of an enlightened buy with a car or trade. Not you, as you’ve found this member and drawing to peruse it in filled so you can take up all the ideas listed below to make buying a car light. Overhaul specie rebates and discounts you are desirable for. The operative should tell you whether it can be driven and if it’s serviceable enough extent for the cost. Always be leery of any used car dealers on the margin of the route. Now that you’ve taken all of this perception in, you know what you have to do next.

All kinds of discounts and rebates are often run. The cars they exchange could have inundation mischief, need greater repairs, and be sold without agreement. Never liberty your car with the dealership last night. Don’t wait to make a buy in your first dealership. Just make sure that the certification is offered by the car manufacturer rather than the trader. Do not lose the remembrance of the takeaway from owning a car when you are laboring out a roll. Do a little examination and fall out if you are capacitated for any of the specific deals that are available. Be shy of using the mechanics that the trader recommended. If you wait, your eyes will be big, and you will be willing to pay anything to get what you want. Take your duration and look around. Fall upon out how much of a lend you are desirable for. This makes it more herculean to advance by steps away from a bad extent, and it is not to your best estate. If you fall upon a better extent elsewhere, you have no responsibility to buy from your first trader. They want to pellucid out their record to make way for shipments of the next year’s models. Sometimes, there are discounts for veterans and students, for example.

Store around before you even come near the lot to fall upon what limited car shops are charging for these services, and then take the quotes you get with you to either get an extent from the trader or leap those add-ons. Form out how much you can yield on a car discharge of debt before you get there. They are in want of the warning needed to make the position incline in their patronize. Many dealerships will present you the duration to take the car that you are considering abode in regularity to trial impel it longer. Make a roll of everything you want, and take that roll along so you can remember everything. Speak to your tumulus or confidence incorporation before you seat the brain out to the dealership when you are in the market for a car. No substance how far into the buy you have gone, remember that you are not tied down into a one-car dealership until you index papers. This should be someone you have faith in. When buying a covenant or subcompact car, make sure that it has enough sweep for someone who will impel it.

Cars are intentionally distinguished because the sellers discern that a transaction must take open space. Do you want a sportier car or a parents and children carriage? If there is a fortuity that someone else will impel the car now and then, fetch them along while shopping. Once you get here, you’ll take the burden of the position and come out on top in the best car ever. These dealers almost always have a less than credible fame. Once you impel that car off the lot, any problems the car has are now your puzzle. If you aren’t concerned about getting the unconditionally latest mold, consider car shopping in November or December. How many races are you going to transfer? In thing done, if you do so, then you are probably constructing a bad buy. A new car has the exposed advantages, but used cars can be a fair serviceable extent as well. This way, you will know how much you can yield to dispose of, and you will know what kind of car to look for.

Private car ownership has grown rapidly during the last two decades. The number of motor vehicles in the world grew from around 75 million to 1 billion between 1950 and 2010, in which 80% of these vehicles are cars and motorcycles, which were primarily used for private transportation (Linda, 27). These increasingly high number of private cars required more parking spaces, produced more pollution, and caused more traffic accident in a crowded place such as downtown area as time went on. We can’t deny the fact that using private vehicles in the city is not only inefficient, dangerous, and lower air quality, but also required resources from the city in which they are struggling to support. Therefore, people should not be allowed to use private vehicles in the downtown area to help increase spaces for the city, reduce pollution, and lower road accident, and the use of private transportation should be replaced by other methods of transit.

First, parking spaces required a lot of large areas that would normally be used for other useful purposes. For example, Scharnhorst reported that there are more than 2.2 million parking spaces in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, which is almost equal to one-tenth of the city. This size of the area can easily be used to build parks, hospitals, schools, and even more city infrastructures. Looking at this number, it is obvious that many cities have overbuilt parking spaces. In fact, the law in the US requires all new developments to include specified amounts of added parking spaces. Many of these spaces exist due to city regulations, requiring developers to provide a certain amount of spaces for every residential and office building they build, on the presumption that residents must drive to get there. The idea of these regulations is to improve the quality of life and convenience for the city’s residents, especially in the US, where private cars are the major choice of transportation. The effect is usually the exact opposite, as parking spaces decrease the area where residents could walk, live, play, and do business. On the other hand, major European cities such as Hamburg and Zurich have been removing unnecessary parking to make wider and safer sidewalks, bike paths, and public benches, which make the city safer for pedestrian and cyclist and further promoting alternative ways to transit other than private cars. Fewer car in the downtown area would decrease the demand for parking spaces in total, creating more area for the city’s development.

Another reason we should not allow cars in the downtown area is pollution, as emissions from private cars increase the amount of carbon monoxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. A typical car engine is an internal combustion engine, operate at what is called air/fuel ratio when there is the correct quantity of air to allow complete combustion of the fuel with no excess oxygen. In reality, the combustion process is not perfect and car engines emit several types of pollutants (Ali and Abd-Rahman, 67). In 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) declared automobiles as ‘mobile sources’ of pollution. Motor vehicles collectively cause 75% of carbon monoxide pollution and 27% of greenhouse gas emissions. While the U.S. has 30% of the world’s automobiles, it contributes roughly half of the world’s carbon emissions from motor vehicles. Private vehicles also create a major impact on air quality, especially during traffic jams and rush hours (Ali and Abd-Rahman, 83). Not only that they are the leading cause of air pollution in the city, but the health risks of air pollution are extremely serious. A study from Union of Concerned Scientists shows that poor air quality heightens respiratory ailments such as asthma and bronchitis, increase the risk of cancer, and reduce average life expectancy by 10 years (‘Vehicles, Air Pollution, and Human Health’). It is no doubt that reducing the number of cars allowed in the city would result in better health and reducing the risk of cancer for the residents.

Finally, private vehicles caused more accidents when compared to the other method of transit such as public transportation and taxi. Supporting the use of public transportation instead of private vehicles will undoubtingly reduce traffic accident in the city. In 2007, Israel introduced the Night Buses project, which is to operate public buses in nighttime and encouraging people to travel by buses instead of their private cars during the late-night hour. The results show a 37% reduction in accidents involving drivers during the night and a 24% reduction in injuries resulting from a late-night accident (Lichtman-Sadot, 30). The city of Hollywood in Florida also implemented similar mass transit project to reduce fatigued driving and providing an alternative to drunk driving, which resulted in fewer incidents of reckless driving overall (Flaxman Law Group). Taxis are also found to be much safer than driving private cars. According to the Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian Federation, the probability of a road accident per 1 km driven is almost 3 times lower for taxis when compared to people driving their private vehicles; furthermore, the number of lethal road accidents per km is roughly 5 times lower for taxis than for private vehicles (‘Taxis Found to Be Three Times Safer than Driving Your Own Car’). In comparison, public transportations are much safer than driving your own vehicle and should be encouraged to do so in a crowded area like downtown.

In conclusion, driving private cars in the downtown area required the city to support them with large and inefficient parking spaces, which otherwise could have been used for public infrastructures or safer pedestrian walks and bike paths. Furthermore, private vehicles also produced a large amount of carbon monoxide and greenhouse gasses, which increase global temperature, reduce air quality and impact respiratory for the city residents, even as far as increasing cancer risks. Finally, private cars caused more accidents than public transportation, and encouraging residents to use other methods of transit can help reduce accidents and reckless driving in the city. While the use of private vehicles is convenient for some people, they caused a lot more problems for the city and the residents, especially in a crowded place like the downtown area. Reducing the number of private vehicles allowed in the downtown area will not only help the residents there, but also help improve the city in general.

Introduction

In every day life, there are many activities that we do which have negative impact on the environment. Most of the environmental degradation occurs from the use of resources or exploitation of these resources. However, consumption remains the major cause of environmental pollution that is done throughout ones life. The environment we live in should be protected by all means if at all there will be life in the future.

In my case I feel that I pollute the environment through the use of gasoline in my car, a Chevrolet Impala that I drive every day for approximately 40 miles per day. Although my car is a flex fuel type that can use gasoline or ethanol or a mixture in any proportion, most of the time I use gasoline due to its availability. The exhaust fumes from the car produces green house gases that is, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and sometimes sulphur gases. The production of green house gases is a threat to the environment and will lead to the problem of global warming. As an environmentalist, I am concerned so much about the environment and I plan to reduce the amount of environmental degradation that I cause every day.

Gasoline consumption

Gasoline is made out of processed crude oil and has a very strong smell. It contains over 150 chemicals that include the BTEX compounds, that is, benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylene. The use of gasoline in my car causes pollution to the environment through the production of the green house gases. Driving for 40 miles a day therefore means that I contribute a lot to the global warming process that is a great environmental disaster. Gasoline is also very volatile and it escapes to the air when I refill my car and the strong fumes are dangerous to both the environment and human health. The following is an equation of the combustion process in my car engine:

My car has the Exhaust Gas Re-circulation device that prevents the formation of the No gases that pollute the air during combustion of gasoline. The car has a perfect engine where combustion of fuel is complete and there is no production of Carbon monoxide. (Frances, 2001 pp. 56-211). However this is not enough because using gasoline causes some amount of pollution to the environment.

The amount of pollution produced by the vehicle every day is an environmental hazard and I feel that I have to do something about it. Gasoline is a fossil fuel that is exploited through mining, the process of its extraction is on its own an environmental degradation process. The mines where they are extracted as crude oil are left bare and cannot be useful for any other activities. Purification process is very expensive and that is the reason why the prices of gasoline continues to rise day in day out. Fossil fuel is non renewable and the use of gasoline in my car reminds me that some years to come, there will be no any gasoline in the world if an alternative is not found. The use of gasoline is very hazardous since it evaporates into the atmosphere which can cause serious environmental problems and health hazards.

The problem of pollution is very expensive as it has long term effects on the environment, the daily contribution of the green house gases to the atmosphere by my little car can cause adverse effects if I do not do something about it. The entire ecosystem is affected by the use of gasoline in cars. The formation of the acid rain destroys vegetation and as a result the natural environment is interfered with. The temperature rise in the globe is alarming and by knowing that I am a contributor to the problem I have looked for resolutions to reduce the rate of pollution that I contribute to the environment by using gasoline.

A plan on reduction of pollution by gasoline

As an environmentalist, I have chosen a lot of alternatives just to make sure that the environment will not blame me for not protecting it. As we all know that nature is very unforgiving. Once you interfere with the environment, at one time you will have to suffer for the degradation. Pollutants from gasoline are very dangerous to the environment and the whole world is working towards a sustainable use of resources including ethanol as a fuel to reduce the amount of green gases released to the atmosphere.

One of the solutions I have decided to apply in the pollution reduction while using gasoline is to minimize the use of the car. Using the car every day for 40 miles contribute so much of the green gases to the atmosphere. The gasoline also costs so much as compared to ethanol which is less pollutant. (Nicholas, 2000 pp. 145-209).

Reducing the number of times I use the car can really be useful in the reduction of pollution. During weekends, I can avoid using my personal car and I can use public means of transport to get to various destinations. I can also spare using the car during week days when I can use the public transport. If I limit the use of the car, I will cut down the expenses I use on gasoline and still be able to safe the environment. I will be using the car only when I cannot avoid, that is, in case of an emergency.

The other option I can use to reduce pollution on the environment is by driving less miles a day. If I should drive each day then, I can cut down the mileage by at least a third. I can afford driving for fewer miles in a day; 30 miles can help to reduce the consumption of gasoline that leads to pollution.

Since my car is fuel flex, I can use ethanol for fuel instead of gasoline. The use of pure ethanol in my car can help reduce pollution. The use of hybrid of E85, which is 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline, is safer and environmental friendly than the use of gasoline. The table that follows shows my car consumption of gasoline and E85 in miles per Gallon (MPG) and the production of pollutant gases.

The fuel economy of using E85 is better than that of gasoline. My car can run for 25 miles on $ 3.75 worth of E85 whereas for gasoline I usually spend $ 3.85 for the same 25 miles. So it is more economical to use E85 and ensure a safer environment that is free from pollution.

Conclusion

In the 18th century when there were fewer cars in the world and the majority of people used horses for travel both long distance and short distances, the environment was so clean and free from green house gases. The issue of global warming did not exist and the world was safe to live in. If all individuals who own cars can adopt these ideas of reducing environmental pollution, then the world can be safe.

“We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort” (Owens). And that is what most self-driving car companies have done, with the help of artificial intelligence and professional engineer, and the great effort put in by them, we can get in a car and go to destinations without doing work. Self-driving cars are really beneficial especially for those with disabilities such as no legs etc., as this will help them get to where they need without relying on others, according to Futurism.com that it increases safety and 1.2 million worldwide are killed each year in traffic accidents.

Less traffic as it will fully rely on artificial intelligence. Buying a self-driving car will save up a lot of money as there will be fewer accidents and therefore fewer hospital visits. Although self-driving cars have many benefits they also have disadvantages mentioned in this essay.

The way that self-driving cars are structured is very similar to how facial and voice recognition is built into our phones where it has the ability to learn certain algorithms based on how it’s being used. Like any cell phone or electronic device, self-driving cars can crash and cause some serious problems. One major disadvantage of self-driving cars is the high risk of technical issues that might come up with the passenger inside the vehicle.

Tesla, one of the most advanced car companies in creating autonomous cars (Alvarez, 2019), has frequently stated that their cars have “the lowest probability of injury ever tested by the agency in its safety ratings program” (Washington Post). Yet questions arise on how well would they function in contrast to a human-driven car. Rodney Brooks, an MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence research director, believes that “even with an appropriate set of guiding principles, there are going to be a lot of perceptual challenges … that are way beyond those that current developers have solved… and perhaps a lot more automated reasoning than any AI systems have so far been expected to demonstrate” (Brooks). Self-driving cars have a high risk of being hacked. There have been multiple experiments done on driverless and even human-driven cars by hacking into a vehicle leading to serious car accidents and possible identity theft. Until autonomous car companies are able to prevent these issues, self-driving cars remain to have higher risks of threatening human life. A disadvantage that self-driving cars have is they cannot detect damaged roads and as a result, they can drive over it causing damage to the car and passengers. Self-driving cars are not fully aware of their surroundings like not stopping or slowing down when a school bus is dropping kids off, another example is a construction worker communicating with passengers to stop or move, and self-driving cars won’t understand.

Damaged roads are a common issue faced in major and minor cities, and self-driving cars are not as developed, when there is a broken road on the way, we human drivers avoid the damaged part of the road as soon as we notice it, this not the case with self-driving cars because they wouldn’t avoid it and drive over it, as a result, this can potentially damage the car and may cause harm to the passengers, in order to fix this problem engineers and computer science professionals should do more studies about implementing a front camera that can scan the road from a long-range, this will allow the self-driving cars to avoid those damaged roads and avoid harm (Ng et al., 2019). Another problem in self-driving cars is when the car approaches an elbow road, it cannot recognize the traffic at the end of the elbow road and wouldn’t decelerate and it would brake immediately and this sometimes can cause the car to crash (YouTube, 2019).

Human drivers usually understand how to act in certain situations such as slowing down when kids are walking around the street or stopping driving when a school bus is dropping kids off, also if a construction worker is trying to communicate with cars to stop or move the self-driving cars would not understand, to solve this ongoing problems engineers and computer science professionals should build a 360 degrees camera over the car that can recognize and understand everything mentioned above and build advanced cameras with infra-red technology and do further studies on those constraints. Hacking the system in a self-driving car can potentially cause major problems and so, system engineers should create a powerful system that cannot be hacked into and do a lot of tests to make sure.

References:

1. Alvarez, S. (2019). Tesla is one of the World’s Most Innovative Companies, says a noted consulting firm. [online] TESLARATI. Available at: https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-most-innovative-companies-in-2019-ranking/ [Accessed 14 Oct. 2019].
2. Coalition For Future Mobility. (2019). Benefits of Self-Driving Vehicles – Coalition For Future Mobility. [online] Available at: https://coalitionforfuturemobility.com/benefits-of-self-driving-vehicles/ [Accessed 15 Oct. 2019].
3. Ng, A., Lin, Y., Ng, A., Lin, Y., Cartoons, W., Hirad, A., Mahon, B., Stoller, M., Tripodi, F., Cartoons, W. and Chung, J. (2019). Self-Driving Cars Won’t Work Until We Change Our Roads—And Attitudes. [online] WIRED. Available at: https://www.wired.com/2016/03/self-driving-cars-wont-work-change-roads-attitudes/ [Accessed 16 Oct. 2019].
4. Ieeexplore.ieee.org. (2019). The issues and the possible solutions for implementing self-driving cars in Bangladesh – IEEE Conference Publication. [online] Available at: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8288950 [Accessed 14 Oct. 2019].
5. Lifehack. (2019). Unbelievable Benefits And Drawbacks Of The Self-Driving Car. [online] Available at: https://www.lifehack.org/articles/technology/unbelievable-benefits-and-drawbacks-the-self-driving-car.html [Accessed 16 Oct. 2019].
6. 123helpme.com. (2019). Essay about Turning a Dream Into Reality — Thomas Paine, the American c. [online] Available at: https://www.123helpme.com/turning-a-dream-into-reality-preview.asp?id=256415 [Accessed 14 Oct. 2019].
7. Futurism. (2019). 7 Benefits of Driverless Cars. [online] Available at: https://futurism.com/images/7-benefits-of-driverless-cars [Accessed 13 Oct. 2019].
8. Madrigal, A. (2019). 7 Arguments Against the Autonomous-Vehicle Utopia. [online] The Atlantic. Available at: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/12/7-arguments-against-the-autonomous-vehicle-utopia/578638/ [Accessed 17 Oct. 2019].
9. Siddiqui, F. (2019). Federal safety regulators scolded Musk over ‘misleading statements’ on Tesla safety. [online] Washington Post. Available at:https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/08/07/federal-safety-regulators-scolded-elon-musk-over-misleading-statements-tesla-safety/ [Accessed 17 Oct. 2019].
10. YouTube. (2019). Tesla Autopilot Not Detecting Stopped Traffic on Highway. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GnysB0rO3s [Accessed 17 Oct. 2019].