Americans are expected to buy a record number of cars in 2016. The American Community Survey says that the share of American workers taking cars to work grew from 86.3 percent in 2010 to 89.7 percent in 2015. So naturally, the New York Times says that America is “over the whole car thing.” The story is illustrated by a photo of riders on a rather empty Los Angeles subway, one of the least-used subways in America.
Despite the misleading illustration, the gist of the article is not that Americans are abandoning cars for transit but that they might abandon car ownership for car sharing. What the Times misses is that a car that is shared might travel 75,000 miles per year, compared with around 15,000 for a privately owned car. That means that shared cars will need to be replaced every three or four years instead of every 20 years.
In other words, car sharing doesn’t mean lower sales for automakers. It might give automakers that can rapidly introduce new products with new technologies a new advantage over manufacturers with longer product cycles. It will also reduce the demand for parking lots.
What’s worse is that there are also chances that after a particular https://unica-web.com/ENGLISH/2016/GA2016-minutes-2.html viagra ordination time period, scoliosis returns to pre-operative levels. Kamagra Works Quickly & Lasts Longer This ED oral try here levitra prescription medicine works within a few minutes of its consumption. Instead, it is cheap and readily available for people cialis in india price suffering from erectile dysfunction. Always remember purchase cialis online that self medication harms.
The Antiplanner has previously noted that the “shared car thing” is probably exaggerated. Car owners pay the marginal cost of driving for each additional trip they take, while car sharers will have to pay the average cost for every trip. Anyone who drives more than the average number of miles per year, and many who drive slightly less than average, will be better off owning rather than sharing. Many others will prefer to own even if it costs a little more just so they can have their own private space. So, while no one knows for sure, the Antiplanner’s guess is that at least half of everyone who owns a car today will continue to own cars in the future.
Shared self-driving cars won’t reduce the demand for highways. But they will reduce the demand for transit that is more expensive, slower, and less convenient. So, contrary to the implications of the article, it is the Los Angeles subway that is the dinosaur, not the automobile. The lesson for the New York Times is that, if they don’t back up anecdotes with real data, they are going to end up with fake news.
Ford’s talk about no longer having to be a car company is reminding me more and more of BP’s Beyond Petroleum rhetoric.
While I agree with the Antiplanners conclusions on this article I do disagree that shared cars will be driven for 3-4 years at 75,000 miles per year and then replaced.
Already we are finding that people living in urban areas are increasingly calling up Uber for some trips and it is highly likely that families will find they do not need one of their cars as a result. This will save the depreciation on the car not bought. When self driving cars arrive they will be perfect for an Uber like service. They can then be driven 21 or even 24 hours per day and rack up very high miles. There are numerous articles on line about hybrid taxi cabs lasting easily being sold with 300,000 miles simply because of city ordinances requiring taxis only be run for this mileage. There are numerous reports of cars being driven much higher mileage. Using Google search terms “high mileage taxi” see:
http://jalopnik.com/this-is-what-a-500-000-mile-nyc-taxi-valvetrain-looks-l-1717745908
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1063767_ford-hybrids-prove-durability-by-racking-up-most-taxi-miles
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1020431_more-proof-that-batteries-last-ford-escape-hybrid-taxis-retire-with-300000-plus-miles
http://www.autotrader.com/car-news/the-highest-mileage-new-york-city-taxis-arent-what-you-think-255766
When electric cars arrive they should be even more reliable with less moving parts. Already some Tesla’s are being used as taxi cabs. The may be limited by charging time to the time they can spend on the road. However the potential is that they will run even more miles without problems. All this means that the depreciation cost per mile will be low and reduce the cost per mile of vehicles.
This is an article on a Tesla taxi:
https://electrek.co/2016/08/16/first-tesla-taxi-in-america-after-100000-miles-why-every-taxi-driver-should-consider-going-electric/
We may see a future where electric self driving cars are summoned on smart phones. They will have programs that calculate the cost of various trips and whether it is worthwhile and what to charge. They will be driven gently which will reduce wear on tires and brakes. They will be able to plan trips and schedules around charging or changing the battery. They will probably be replaced because they become technologically obsolete rather than worn out. All of this should lower the cost per mile and per trip.
The Antiplanner wrote:
It will also reduce the demand for parking lots.
That is perhaps the most-important sentence in this post.
For many years, big-city municipal government have used parking as a source of revenue (that’s not such a bad thing) but also as a way to force people to use public transportation, even if it is slow, inconvenient and sometimes not reliable.
With self-driving vehicles, the car can park itself someplace else (and probably at little or much less cost than a downtown parking space), thus making transit even less attractive than it was before (as with many things involving transit, this may not apply in New York County, N.Y. (Manhattan)).