Aug 15 (Reuters) – Consulting firm KPMG and the Center for
Automotive Research in Michigan released a report this month
about how close the industry is to rolling out self-driving
cars. They see the first such vehicles hitting showrooms in
2019, with a more developed infrastructure by 2025.
However, KPMG and CAR said the implications of a totally
driverless car that doesn’t crash would be huge:
* Automakers cut weight from cars and trucks as crashless
cars do not need to be made with as much reinforced steel or as
many safety devices like airbags. That would lower vehicle
costs, speed up vehicle development time and boost fuel
efficiency.
* Automated cars would drive in tighter packs because
computers would control their speed and spacing. That would mean
smaller roads were necessary and result in the elimination of
shoulders and guardrails, leading to a significant reduction in
the $75 billion spent annually on roads, highways and other
infrastructure.
* With computers controlling the cars, driving would be more
efficient and thus faster, leading to less congestion on the
roads. Fuel consumption would decline and companies that rely on
just-in-time delivery could reduce inventories even further.
* Automated cars also would allow for the elimination of
traffic and road lights in many cases. That would slash energy
use drastically.
* Driverless cars would mean a change in the way drivers are
insured, and could even end the need for car insurance.
* Hospitals would lose more than two million crash victims
sent annually to U.S. emergency rooms.
* Crashless cars would mean auto repair shops see fewer
damaged cars, meaning they would need to shift their business
model to serving the aftermarket needs of existing cars that
lack autonomous driving systems.
* Steelmakers would have to adjust to a world where cars use
less of their product.
* State and local governments would have to adjust to the
loss of traffic fines, possibly reducing their police forces.
Governments might seek to replace some of that lost revenue;
perhaps with infrastructure usage fees.
* Less expensive, driverless cars would open ownership to
new audiences like younger generations or even the blind, but
they also could lead to wider vehicle sharing that would slash
global sales.
* If vehicle sharing expanded, cars could be summoned as
needed and people could pay for mobility services as needed
instead of owning a vehicle.
* Autonomous transportation could eliminate the need for and
cost of high-speed trains.
* Vehicle sharing could keep vehicles in more constant use,
reducing the need for parking lots that take up a lot of land in
cities.
* Lighter, easier-to-build cars could open the auto industry
to new rivals using a model like Apple’s, where a
company designs and markets a product but outsources its
construction.
* A connected, driverless car network would require security
from hackers and would raise privacy concerns with many
consumers.
For a fuller story, please click on
(Reporting by Ben Klayman in Detroit; Editing by Leslie
Gevirtz)
