Life is Always Better with Cars: A Brief Look on the Automobile

L

ays better, w w l a s i ith ife

Cars!

A Brief Look on the Automobile

1

Š2017 by Adrian Arman Nanyang Technological University School of Art, Design and Media Singapore. All Rights Reserved.

Printed in Singapore 2

Contents

THE AUTOMOBILE

From the Carriage to the Automobile ................................ 4 The Roaring Twenties .......................................................... 14 The Baby Boom .................................................................... 16 Car Innovations until the 20th Century ........................... 22 Car Classification in the 20th Century ............................. 24

PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE

How the Debate over Public vs. Private Transportation Hurts Everyone by Robert Bruegmann .............................. 26 Can Public Transport Compete with the Private Car?

by Linda Steg ........................................................................ 30

THE FUEL

Alternative Fuels .................................................................. 36 Emerging Fuels .................................................................... 38

THE FUTURE

Will Driverless Cars Solve Our Energy Problems—or Just Create New Ones? by Brad Plumer ............................. 40 Notable Concept Cars ......................................................... 44 Elon Musk: Model S Not a Car but a ‘Sophisticated Computer on Wheels’ Jerry Hirsch .................................... 48

3

From the Carriage to the Automobile

1770 CUGNOT’S STEAM WAGON

4

Steam-powered self-propelled vehicles large enough to transport people and cargo were first devised in the late 18th century. Nicolas-Joseph Cugnot demonstrated his fardier à vapeur (“steam dray”), an experimental steam-driven artillery tractor, in 1770 and 1771. As Cugnot’s design proved to be impractical, his invention was not developed in his native France.

186 4 THE OTTO ENGINE

In 1864, Otto and Eugen Langen founded the first internal combustion engine production company, NA Otto and Cie (NA Otto and Company). Otto and Cie succeeded in creating a successful atmospheric engine that same year. The factory ran out of space and was moved to the town of Deutz, Germany in 1869 where the company was renamed to Deutz Gasmotorenfabrik AG (The Deutz Gas Engine Manufacturing Company). In 1872, Gottlieb Daimler was technical director and Wilhelm Maybach was the head of engine design. Daimler was a gunsmith who had worked on the Lenoir engine. By 1876, Otto and Langen succeeded in creating the first internal combustion engine that compressed the fuel mixture prior to combustion for far higher efficiency than any engine created to this time.

5

1885 THE DAIMLER REITWAGEN

Daimler and Maybach left their employ at Otto and Cie and developed the first high-speed Otto engine in 1883. In 1885, they produced the first automobile to be equipped with an Otto engine.

The Daimler Reitwagen used a hot-tube ignition system and the fuel known as Ligroin to become the world’s first vehicle powered by an internal combustion engine. It used a four-stroke engine based on Otto’s design.

In 1884, Otto’s company, then known as Gasmotorenfabrik Deutz (GFD), developed electric ignition and the carburetor. In 1890, Daimler and Maybach formed a company known as Daimler Motoren Gesellschaft. Today, that company is Daimler-Benz.

6

1886 THE BENZ-PATENT MOTORWAGEN

The Benz Patent-Motorwagen was a threewheeled automobile with a rear-mounted engine.

The vehicle contained many new inventions. It was constructed of steel tubing with woodwork panels. The steel-spoked wheels and solid rubber tires were Benz’s own design. Steering was by way of a toothed rack that pivoted the unsprung front wheel. Fully elliptic springs were used at the back along with a live axle and chain drive on both sides. A simple belt system served as a single-speed transmission, varying torque between an open disc and drive disc.

The first Motorwagen used the Benz 954 cc single-cylinder four-stroke engine with trembler coil ignition. It is widely regarded as the first car.

7

8

Article from The World’s Work, 1903 9

19 08 THE FORD MODEL T

10

The Ford Model T is an automobile that was produced by Ford Motor Company from October 1, 1908, to May 26, 1927. It is generally regarded as the first affordable automobile, the car that opened travel to the common middle-class American.

The Ford Model T was named ‘The Most Inf luential Car of the 20th Century’ in the 1999 Car of the Century competition. Ford’s Model T was not only successful because it provided inexpensive transportation on a massive scale, but also because the car signified innovation for the rising middle class and became a powerful symbol of America’s age of modernization. With 16.5 million sold it stands eighth on the top ten list of most sold cars of all time as of 2012.

12, 1908 and left the factory on September 27, 1908, at the Ford Piquette Avenue Plant in Detroit, Michigan. On May 26, 1927, Henry Ford watched the 15 millionth Model T Ford roll off the assembly line at his factory in Highland Park, Michigan.

Although automobiles had already existed for decades, they were still mostly scarce and expensive at the Model T’s introduction in 1908. Positioned as reliable, easily maintained mass market transportation, it was a runaway success. In a matter of days after the release, 15,000 orders were placed. The first production Model T was produced on August

Although credit for the development of the assembly line belongs to Ransom E. Olds with the first mass-produced automobile, the Oldsmobile Curved Dash, beginning in 1901, the tremendous advancements in the efficiency of the system over the life of the Model T can be credited almost entirely to the vision of Ford and his engineers.

The Model T was Ford’s first automobile mass-produced on moving assembly lines with completely interchangeable parts, marketed to the American middle class.

11

Once upon a time, in a faraway land called “America” —

12

— there was a car.

And 15 million more.

13

The Roaring Twenties During the time period from 1919 to 1923, primarily North America and parts of Europe experienced the rise of the Roaring Twenties, social, and economic circumstances underwent dramatic changes. The economic power and high employment of the United States allowed Americans to spend more extravagantly on entertainment. War veterans returned home seeking relaxation and comfort, instead of returning to their factory or agricultural duties. Watching movies and listening to the newly invented radio became increasingly popular during this period, which further encouraged the desires of people for Hollywood style lives of indulgence and ease.

This extravagance was ignited by the introduction of Henry Ford’s Model T, a car affectionately known as “Tin Lizzie.” Cars became a major source of freedom and greatly altered the standard of living and social patterns, and differentiated suburban and urban living purposes. In addition, the rise of cars led to the creation of new leisure activities and businesses. The car became the center of middle and working class life, until the start of World War II.

SUBURBAN LIVING AND THE URBAN WORKPLACE

Cars allowed for f lexibility in the living areas of the working class, who were no longer tied to living near train stations and trolley lines for transportation to their areas of employment. Many members of the middle class began to separate their lives at home and at work by living in suburban areas and commuting to urban areas for employment. Those who lived in urban areas did not need cars to commute to areas for leisure or for work, which separated the status of people. People who lived in urban areas could be assumed as people who could not afford cars, and people who lived in suburban areas who had to commute to urban areas for work and leisure could be assumed as relatively wealthy. Overall, job opportunities and social distinctions both increased.

RISES IN THE STANDARD OF LIVING

As cars transformed from being a luxury to a commonplace household item, and as larger distinctions were made between the higher and lower classes, standards of living increased. The mass production of vehicles led to the mass production of newer technologies that went along with the theme of convenience in society at the time. Henry Ford set his cars at an affordable price for the middle classes in North America and Europe, and paid his workers relatively well for the time period. This inf luenced production in other industries, including in appliances. Soon, the average household had one car, refrigerator, stove, and washing machine. There became an evident difference between early times of hard work, and the times of ease and recreation during the Roaring Twenties.

Motels emerged in 1925 for the purpose of accommodating cross country drivers. The name “motel” originated from motor-hotels, in which guests

14

were given the convenience of parking their cars for free in a space that was directly across from their hotel room. Motels were created as drop-in services, and attracted travelers due to its low cost lodging and f lexibility.

THE DRIVE-IN

As the number of cross country drivers increased, the number of roadside restaurants did as well. However, these restaurants were created with the purpose of allowing their customers to dine at their own pace, whether it was taking food to-go or stopping by for a quick meal. Some restaurants were designed to allow customers to dine without leaving their cars. This fast paced method led to the development of drive-in-movies, drive-inbanks, and fast food restaurants.

CONSUMER CREDIT

Prior to the widespread introduction of the car, instalment buying, or credit, was used to pay for a limited amount of products. However, in 1916, the use of credit expanded due to the competition between car dealers to match the low price of Ford’s Model T. Medium priced car dealers allowed for their customers to pay in several payments over time for their cars. Soon after, the purchase of cars became credit-based in all countries. This method of payment also eventually became used for the purchase of other consumer goods. The use of credit attracted more customers to buying items that they previously would not have been able to afford.

AUTO RACING

The freedoms and recreation that cars provided led to the invention of car racing. Onlookers enjoyed this new form of racing and often made car purchases based on car models and brands in the race. This was one way that automotive companies were able to advertise for their new cars.

In 1922, a contestant named Noel Bullock participated in the Pikes Peak, Colorado championship race with his Model T, named “Old Liz.” “Old Liz” was compared to a tin can due to its lack of paint and hood, which gave the car its nickname, “Tin Liz.” Tin Liz’s sturdiness and speed led to its winning of the race against all other expensive cars of the time. From that point on, “Tin Lizzie” became the name for all Model T cars, as its win was reported in newspapers throughout the country. This further popularized Ford cars, as well as the sport of auto racing. Auto racing eventually led to the development of NASCAR.

15

The Baby Boom 1950s American automobile culture has had an enduring inf luence on the culture of the United States, as ref lected in popular music, major trends from the 1950s and mainstream acceptance of the “hot rod” culture. The American manufacturing economy switched from producing warrelated items to consumer goods at the end of World War II, and by the end of the 1950s, one in six working Americans were employed either directly or indirectly in the automotive industry.

The United States became the world’s largest manufacturer of automobiles, and Henry Ford’s goal of 30 years earlier—that any man with a good job should be able to afford an automobile—was achieved. A new generation of service businesses focusing on customers with their automobiles sprang up during the decade, including drive-through or drive-in restaurants and more drive-in theaters (cinemas).

The decade began with 25 million registered automobiles on the road, most of which predated World War II and were in poor condition; no automobiles or parts were produced during the war owing to rationing and restrictions. By 1950, most factories had made the transition to a consumer-based economy, and more than 8 million cars were produced that year alone. By 1958, there were more than 67 million cars registered in the United States, more than twice the number at the start of the decade.

THE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM

The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways (commonly called the Interstate system or simply the Interstate) is a network of freeways that forms a part of the National Highway System of the United States. While serving as Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II, Eisenhower had gained an appreciation of the German Autobahn network as an essential component of a national defense system, providing transport routes for military supplies and troop deployments. Construction was authorized by the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956, and the original portion was completed 35 years later. The system has contributed in shaping the United States into a world economic superpower and a highly industrialized nation.

The Interstate grew quickly, along with the automobile industry, allowing a new-found mobility that permeated ways of American life and culture. The automobile and the Interstate became the American symbol of individuality and freedom, and, for the first time, automobile buyers accepted that the automobile they drove indicated their social standing and level of aff luence. Also, the United States’ investment in infrastructure coincided with the increasing availability of cars more

16

suited to the higher speeds that better roads made possible, allowing people to live beyond the confines of major cities, and instead commute to and from work.

DECLINE OF THE INNER CITY

More people joined the middle class in the 1950s, with more money to spend, and the availability of consumer goods expanded along with the economy, including the automobile Americans were spending more time in their automobiles and viewing them as an extension of their identity, which helped to fuel a boom in automobile sales. Most businesses directly or indirectly related to the auto industry saw tremendous growth during the decade. New designs and innovations appealed to a generation tuned into fashion and glamour, and the new-found freedom and way of life in the suburbs had several unforeseen consequences for the inner cities. The 1950s saw the beginning of white f light and urban sprawl, driven by increasing automobile ownership. Many local and national transportation laws encouraged suburbanization, which in time ended up damaging the cities economically.

As more middle-class and aff luent people f led the city to the relative quiet and open spaces of the suburbs, the urban centers deteriorated and lost population. At the same time that cities were experiencing a lower tax base due to the f light of higher income earners, pressures from The New Deal forced them to offer pensions and other benefits, increasing the average cost of benefits per employee by 1,629 percent. This was in addition to hiring an average of 20 percent more employees to serve the ever shrinking cities. More Americans were driving cars and fewer were using public transportation, and it was not practical to extend to the suburbs. At the same time, the number of surface roads exploded to serve the ever-increasing numbers of individually owned cars, further burdening city and country resources. During this time, the perception of using public transportation turned more negative. In what is arguably the most extreme example, Detroit, the fifth largest city in the United States in 1950 with 1,849,568 residents, had shrunk to 706,585 by 2010, a reduction of 62 percent.

In some instances, the automotive industry and others were directly responsible for the decline of public transportation. The Great American Streetcar Scandal saw GM, Firestone Tire, Standard Oil of California, Phillips Petroleum, Mack Trucks and other companies purchase a number of streetcars and electric trains in the 1930s and 1940s, such that 90 percent of city trolleys had been dismantled by 1950. It was argued that this was a deliberate destruction of streetcars as part of a larger strategy to push the United States into automobile dependency. In United States National City Lines, Inc., many were found guilty of antitrust violations.

The increasing popularity of hot rodding cars (modifying them to increase performance) is ref lected in part by the creation of specialinterest magazines catering to this culture. Hot Rod is the oldest such magazine, with first editor Wally Parks, and founded by Robert E. Petersen in 1948, with original publication by his Petersen Publishing Company. Hot Rod has licensed affiliation with Universal Technical Institute.

17

The relative abundance and inexpensive nature of the Ford Model T and other cars from the 1920s to 1940s helped fuel the hot rod culture that developed, which was focused on getting the most linear speed out of these older automobiles. The origin of the term “hot rod” is unclear, but the culture blossomed in the post-war culture of the 1950s. The Bonneville Salt Flats, a 30,000-acre region has been called the “Holy Grail of American Hot Rodding”, and is often used for land speed racing, a tradition that grew rapidly in the 1950s and continues today.

Hot rodding was about more than raw power. Kustom Kulture started in the 1950s, when artists such as Von Dutch transformed automobile pin striping from a seldom-used accent that followed the lines of the car into a freestyle art form. Von Dutch was as famous for his “f lying eyeball” as he was for his intricate spider-web designs. As the decade began, handdrawn pin striping was almost unheard of, but by 1958 it had become a popular method of customizing the looks of the hot rod. As the decade progressed, hot rodding became a popular hobby for a growing number of teenagers as the sport literally came to Main Street.

FASTER FOOD

A number of other successful “drive up” businesses have their roots in the 1950s, including McDonald’s (expanded c. 1955), which had no dine-in facilities, requiring customers to park and walk up to the window, taking their order “to go”. Automation and the lack of dining facilities allowed McDonald’s to sell burgers for 15 cents each, instead of the typical 35 cents, and people were buying them by the bagful. By 1948, they had fired their carhops, installed larger grills, reduced their menu and radically changed the industry by introducing assembly-line methods of food production, similar to the auto industry, dubbing it the “Speedee Service System”. They redesigned their sign specifically to make it easier to see from the road, creating the now familiar yellow double-arch structure. Businessman Ray Kroc joined McDonald’s as a franchise agent in 1955. He subsequently purchased the chain from the McDonald brothers and oversaw its worldwide growth.

Other chains were created to serve the increasingly mobile patron.

Carl Karcher opened his first Carl’s Jr. in 1956, and rapidly expanded, locating his restaurants near California’s new freeway off-ramps. These restaurant models initially relied on the new and ubiquitous ownership of automobiles, and the willingness of patrons to dine in their automobiles. As of 2013, drive-through service account for 65 percent of their profits.

MORE DRIVE-IN SERVICES

18

Although drive-in movies first appeared in 1933, it was not until well after the post-war era that they became popular, enjoying their greatest success in the 1950s, reaching a peak of more than 4,000 theaters in the United States alone. Drive-in theaters have been romanticized in popular culture with the movie American Graffiti and Grease and the television series Happy Days. They developed a reputation for showing B movies, typically monster or horror films, and as “passion pits”, a place for teenagers to make out. While drive-in theaters are rarer today with only 366 remaining and no longer unique to America, they are still associated as part of the 1950s’ American car culture. Robert Schuller started the nation’s first drive-in church in 1955 in Garden

Grove, California. After his regular 9:30 am service in the chapel four miles away, he would travel to the drive-in for a second Sunday service.

Worshipers listened to his sermon from the comfort of their cars, using the movie theater’s speaker boxes.

THE MALL

The first modern shopping malls were built in the 1950s, such as Bergen Mall, which was the first to use the term “mall” to describe the business model. Other early malls moved retailing away from the dense, commercial downtowns into the largely residential suburbs. Northgate in Seattle is credited as being the first modern mall design, with two rows of businesses facing each other and a walkway separating them. It opened in 1950. Shopper’s World in Framingham, Massachusetts, was the two-story mall, and opened a year later. The design was modified again in 1954 when Northland Center in Detroit, Michigan, used a centralized design with an anchor store in the middle of the mall, ringed by other stores. This was the first mall to have the parking lot completely surrounding the shopping center, and to provide central heat and air-conditioning.

In 1956, Southdale Center opened in Edina, Minnesota, just outside Minneapolis. It was the first to combine all these modern elements, being enclosed with a two-story design, central heat and airconditioning plus a comfortable common area. It also featured two large department stores as anchors. Most industry professionals consider Southdale Center to be the first modern regional mall.

This formula (enclosed space with stores attached, away from downtown and accessible only by automobile) became a popular way to build retail across the world. Victor Gruen, one of the pioneers in mall design, came to abhor this effect of his new design; he decried the creation of enormous “land wasting seas of parking” and the spread of suburban sprawl.

AFTERMARKET

The 1950s jump started an industry of aftermarket add-ons for cars that continues today. The oldest aftermarket wheel company, American Racing, started in 1956 and still builds “mag wheels” (alloy wheels) for almost every car made. Holley introduced the first modular fourbarrel carburetor, which Ford offered in the 1957 Ford Thunderbird, and versions are still used by performance enthusiasts. Edelbrock started during the Great Depression and expanded after the war. They provided a variety of high performance parts for the new hot rodders, which was popular equipment for setting speed records at Bonneville Salt Flats. Owners were no longer restricted to the original equipment provided by manufacturers, helping not only create the hot rod culture but also the foundation for cosmetic modifications. The creation and rapid expansion of the aftermarket made it possible for enthusiasts to personalize their automobiles.

Starting in the mid-1950s, new car introductions in the fall once again became an anticipated event, as all dealers would reveal the models for the upcoming year each October. In this era before the popularization of computerization, the primary source of information on new models was the dealer.[67] The idea was originally suggested in the 1930s by 19

President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression, as a way of stimulating the economy by creating demand. The idea was reintroduced by President Dwight Eisenhower for the same reasons, and this method of introducing next year’s models in the preceding autumn lasted well into the 1990s.

MUSCLE CARS

The muscle-car era is deeply rooted in the 1950s. The horsepower race centered around the V8 engine and the muscle-car era lasted until new smog regulations forced dramatic changes in OEM engine design in the early 1970s. This in turn opened up new opportunities for aftermarket manufacturers like Edelbrock. Each year brought larger engines and/or increases in horsepower, providing a catalyst for customers to upgrade to newer models. Automobile executives also deliberately updated the body designs yearly, in the name of “planned obsolescence” and added newly developed or improved features such as automatic transmissions, power steering, power brakes and cruise control, in an effort to make the previous models seem outdated and facilitate the long drive from the suburbs. Record sales made the decade arguably the “golden era” of automobile manufacturing.

Harley Earl and Bill France Sr. popularized the saying “Race on Sunday, sell on Monday”, a mantra still heard today in motorsports, particularly within NASCAR. During the muscle-car era, manufacturers not only sponsored the drivers, but designed stock cars specifically to compete in the fast-growing and highly popular sport.

20

21

Car Innovations until the 20th Century Pre-19th Century 3500 B.C. : Introduction of the wheel for ground vehicles.

2000 B.C. : Introduction of the spoked wheel.

1328 : First drawing of a wind wagon by Guido da Vigevano.

1595 : First vehicle suspended on springs, described by Fausto Venanzio.

1599 : Simon Stevin builds a sail wagon.

1630 : First description of tractive wheels (operated by humans on board) for a vehicle

(they had already been used on war engines).

1673 : First idea about an internal combustion engine operated by an explosive charge

according to the Dutch physicist C. Huygens.

1690 : D. Papin develops an idea about a steam engine suitable to move a motor carriage.

1770 : N. J. Cugnot builds up a steam carriage with a pressure vessel and two cylinders

acting on the front single wheel axle.

The 19th Century 1802 : R. Trevithick builds his first steam coach, opens era of steam coaches in England.

1803 : R. Trevithick invents a steam engine on rails; an horizontal cylinder moves the rear

axle with a rod and crank mechanism.

1807 : I. De Rivaz builds a vehicle with an atmospheric internal combustion engine,

working on hydrogen and electrical spark plug.

1817 : Ackermann, English agent of the German inventor G. Längensberger, files a patent

about steering of four wheels vehicles in cinematically correct conditions.

1822 : The first commercial service of steam coaches (London–Birmingham) is started.

1823 : First electric car made by Jacobi.

1824 : S. Carnot publishes his treatise on thermal engineswhere he defines an operating

cycle and the related thermal efficiency.

1828 : F. Pecqueur invents, files a patent on a differential to be applied on a steam carriage.

1839 : C. Goodyear invents the vulcanization process, to improve the mechanical

properties of rubber.

1845 : R. W. Thompson files a patent about a tire, to be applied to a horse carriage to reduce

the traction force and improve comfort.

1846 : Thomas Hancock builds a solid rubber tire to be added to the steel tires of the

wheels of coaches.

1856 : E. Barsanti and F. Matteucci file patent about the first automatic combustion engine.

1860 : E. Lenoir introduces a double acting gas internal combustion engine, without

compression; it is the first to be produced industrially.

1862 : A. Beau De Rochas gives a description of a four cycle internal combustion engine

with compression.

1865 : The Red flag law requiring the presence of a man walking in front of the motor

vehicles with a red flag and a speed limit of 6.4km/h is passed in England. It ended

the era of the steam coaches.

1867 : N. A. Otto, E. Langen start production of atmospheric internal combustion engine.

1878 : C. Jeantaud, a French car manufacturer, develops a link mechanism to obtain

Ackermann conditions in practice.

1880 : A. De Bollée builds the steam cars Obeissante, Mancelle and Rapide; the last one, a 6

places car, is capable of a speed of 60km/h.

22

1884

1884

1886 1886 1888

1890

1891

1892 1896 1899

1899

: The patents of N. A. Otto are cancelled, because of prior claims by A. Beau De Rochas. From this date internal combustion engines are free of any licence burden. : G. Daimler develops the first four stroke single cylinder internal combustion engine for vehicles, featuring 0.5HP (0.35kW). : K. Benz develops first car driven by an internal combustion single cylinder engine. : First Daimler car. 1887 : R. A. Bosch files a patent about electrical magneto ignition. : J. B. Dunlop files a patent about bicycle tires, but the patent is invalidated in 1890 because of Thompson’s priorities. : Panhard and Levassor presents the first car with front engine and rear driving axle with an engine built under Daimler’s licence. : Peugeot introduces his car, with Panhard and Levassor engine. Panhard and Levassor and Peugeot are first in the world to produce cars with industrial processes. : R. Diesel files a patent about a constant pressure internal combustion cycle. : E. and A. Michelin apply a pneumatic tire to a car. : L. Renault develops the first direct drive gearbox, a shaft transmission with universal joint and, immediately after, the first sedan car. : The French government enforces the first Highway code with a maximum speed of 30 km/h in the country and 20 km/h in the town, and introduced the driving license.

The 20th Century 1905 : De Dion-Bouton develops the first single disc friction clutch.

1910 : Isotta-Fraschini introduces the first four-wheel braking system.

1912 : Cadillac introduces the first electric starter and the breaker ignition according to the

ideas of C. Kettering.

1920 : Artz in Germany develops the first stamping press for steel sheets.

1921 : Duesenberg develops the first hydraulic braking system with Lockheed components.

1922 : Lancia develops the first unitized body.

1927 : Budd and Dodge develop the first electrical spot welding process.

1927 : Bosch develops the first high pressure diesel injection pump.

1928 : Packard applies the first synchromesh gearbox.

1933 : Lancia develops the first unitized body for a sedan car.

1936 : Mercedes introduces the first car with a prechamber diesel engine.

1939 : Packard applies the first air conditioning system.

1947 : Goodrich invents the tubeless tire.

1948 : Buick applies first automatic transmission of planetary gears and a torque converter.

1949 : Michelin introduces the first radial tire.

1952 : General Motors applies the first hydraulic power steering system.

1954 : Mercedes develops the first direct gasoline injection engine for a car.

1954 : Ford and Chevrolet apply the first pneumatic power brake system.

1955 : Citroën applies the first disk brake to a car.

1959 : Volvo applies the first three point safety belt.

1960 : The first emission regulations are presented by Senator E. Muskie in the USA. 1960 : Bosch develops the first oxygen sensor.

1960 : Bosch introduces the first diesel rotary pump.

1962 : Ford introduces the first rack-and-pinion steering box.

1967 : Bosch introduces the first electronic gasoline injection system.

1973 : Engelhard develops the first three way catalist for exhaust gas after-treatment.

1974 : Bosch introduces the first air flow meter for gasoline injection systems.

1978 : Bosch introduces the first ABS system.

1988 : FIAT applies the first direct injection diesel engine to a car.

1990 : Pioneer introduces the first navigation system based on GPS technology system.

1995 : Bosch introduces the first vehicle dynamic control electronic system system.

1997 : FIAT introduces the first diesel common rail injection system in a car engine.

23

Car Classification in the 20th Century MICRO CAR Straddling the boundary between car and motorbike, these vehicles have engines under 1.0 litre, typically seat only two passengers, and are sometimes unorthodox in construction. Microcars were popular in postwar Europe, where their appearance led them to be called “Bubble cars”.

Example: Tata Pixel.

HATCHBACK A hatchback is a car body configuration with a rear door that swings upward to provide access to a cargo area. Hatchbacks may feature folddown second row seating, where the interior can be f lexibly reconfigured to prioritize passenger vs. cargo volume. Hatchbacks may feature two- or three-box design. Example: Toyota Etios Liva.

COUPE A closed two-door car body style with a permanently attached fixed roof, that is shorter than a sedan / saloon of the same model, and it often has seating for two persons or with a tight-spaced rear seat. The term was first applied to 19th-century carriages, where the rear-facing seats had been eliminated, or cut out. Example: BMW 327.

SEDAN / SALOON A passenger car in a three-box configuration with A, B & C-pillars and principal volumes articulated in separate compartments for engine, passenger and cargo. The passenger compartment features two rows of seats and adequate passenger space in the rear compartment for adult passengers. The cargo compartment is typically in the rear, with the exception of some rear-engined models. It is one of the most common car body styles. Example: BMW M3.

VAN In some countries, the term “van” can refer to a small panel van based on a passenger car design (often the estate model / station wagon); it also refers to light trucks, which themselves are sometimes based on SUVs or MPVs (but note that those retaining seats and windows, while being larger and more utilitarian than MPVs, may be called “minibuses”).

Example: Dodge Ram. SPORTS CAR A sports car (sportscar) is a small, usually two seater, two door automobile designed for spirited performance and nimble handling. Sports cars may be spartan or luxurious, but high maneuverability and minimum weight are requisite. They may be equipped for racing, especially an aerodynamically shaped one-passenger or two-passenger vehicle having a low center of gravity and steering and suspension designed for precise control at high speeds. Example: Lamborghini Aventador.

24

SUPER CAR A supercar is a luxury, high-performance sports car or grand tourer.

The term is used in marketing by automakers for unusual, high-end vehicles, and has been used to refer to at least four different sorts of cars: (1) limited-production specials from an “elite” automaker, (2) standard-looking cars modified for power and performance, (3) models that appeal to enthusiasts, from smaller manufacturers, and (4) one-of-akind “showcase” project vehicles built by custom car retrofitters (usually extensively modified collectible muscle cars or grand tourers updated to the latest “streetable” racing technology). Example: Pagani Zonda R. MUSCLE CAR Muscle car is an American term used to refer to a variety of highperformance automobiles. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines muscle cars as “any of a group of American-made 2-door sports cars with powerful engines designed for high-performance driving.” A large V8 engine is fitted in a 2-door, rear wheel drive, family-style compact, mid-size or full-size car designed for four or more passengers. Sold at an affordable price, muscle cars are intended for street use and occasional drag racing. Example: Pontiac GTO. ROADSTER A roadster is an open two-seat car with emphasis on sporting appearance or character. Initially an American term for a two-seat car with no weather protection. Example: Honda S2000 Roadster.

CONVERTIBLE / CABRIOLET An automobile body style that can convert between an open-air mode and an enclosed one, varying in degree and means by model. Convertibles evolved from the earlier phaeton, an open vehicle without glass side windows that sometimes had removable panels of fabric or other material for protection from the elements. Example: Mazda MX-5.

CROSSOVER Crossover SUVs are derived from an automobile platform using a monocoque construction with light off-road capability and lower ground clearance than SUVs. They may be styled similar to conventional “offroaders”, or may be look similar to an estate car or station wagon.

Example: Mitsubishi Outlander.

HYBRID CAR A hybrid vehicle uses two or more distinct types of power, such as internal combustion engine plus electric motor, e.g. in diesel-electric trains using diesel engines and electricity from overhead lines, and submarines that use diesels when surfaced and batteries when submerged. Example: Toyota Prius.

25

Travel at its Best ...

Take a Ride on the Public Bus! “How the Debate over Public vs. Private Transportation Hurts Everyone� by Robert Bruegmann from the University of Illinois, Chicago 2014/07/23

26

A great deal of the discourse about cities in recent years has revolved around issues involving public vs. private. This has sometimes been a useful and illuminating conversation.

Too often, however, the conversation descends almost immediately into a stand-off because of basic disagreements about the role of individuals, families, institutions and the government in today’s society. These entrenched partisan positions make it difficult to negotiate usefully about an entire range of urban phenomena from acceptable behavior in public places to the rise of gated communities or from the gentrification of central city neighborhoods to the privatization of basic infrastructure.

In some ways this binary opposition of private vs. public has obscured a central fact about life in the mixed economic and political system in which we live. Our current notions about what is or should be public or private are relatively recent and based on assumptions that are constantly changing. It is also the case that the line between the two is much more blurred than the usual debates would suggest.

After all, in Western democracies, most adult

citizens are consumers in the market at the same time as they are voters and actors in the public sphere. Even with a given individual the interests are often contradictory and changing.

It is not surprising, then, that debates based on the assumption of sharp distinction between public and private are often frustrating and unproductive, particularly in a fast changing world.

The battles between private and public transportation provide an excellent example of the way that doctrinaire notions impede progress toward useful solutions. Let’s take an historical example. In many cities around the country in the early 20th century private rail companies ran streetcar lines under a franchise from local governments. In the 1910s, quite unexpectedly, there appeared a competitor to these municipally regulated monopolies. Owners of private automobiles started to offer rides to passengers, often along the same route as the streetcars. At first these so-called jitney drivers were only a nuisance for the rail operators, but in short order they became a major threat because they offered a more comfortable and cheaper ride and,

because they were not obliged to follow fixed routes or make fixed stops, they were often considerably faster and more convenient for riders.

If the streetcar operators had been making a healthy profit they probably could simply have undercut the jitney operator in cost. However, many of these companies had been created in part to help make new areas of the city accessible and thereby help sales of real estate owned by company officers.

When these real estate sales declined once the land adjacent to the rail lines was developed and certain lines proved unprofitable, they were often unable to discontinue those lines because of requirements by local governments to maintain service. That, in turn, gave them little incentive to keep their tracks in good repair or to provide enough vehicles to avoid overcrowding.

Faced with this inherent problem and potentially disastrous competition, the streetcar operators turned to local governments for help. They argued that the jitney service benefited from the fact that it was unregulated and that it was cherry27

picking customers from the most profitable routes without the burden of providing service for the entire region. They further argued that the jitney drivers were unlicensed and potentially unsafe. In the end, most municipal governments around the country established regulations, ostensibly for public protection, that made most jitney service uneconomic.

The number of jitneys declined precipitously and they no longer were able to compete directly with the railroad companies. Of course, the railroad companies’ problems went deeper than the competition from jitneys. The episode was an important demonstration of the advantages to them offered by rubber wheeled vehicles on public right of way and they soon switched to buses. Even so, the inherent problems of making a profit on a highly regulated monopoly eventually led to the eventual demise of every one of the private surface lines and the assumption of their routes by public agencies.

Now, in this episode, was the defeat of the jitneys and victory of the streetcar monopolies a triumph of the public interests or a defeat? To answer that question you would have to start with another one: Where did private interest lie and where public interest?

It would seem that answering that question, in turn, would entirely depend on which private interests and which public interests we are talking about in a situation where the very distinction between the two turns out to be

28

quite blurred.

Let’s fast forward to today. We may well be on the verge of a very similar episode.

Today most American cities have public monopolies responsible for running public transit, which today is primarily buses and trains. A great many planners and scholars have been arguing strenuously for decades that the automobile has been a deleterious element in urban development, that the push for roads and parking has destroyed central cities, that the enhanced mobility has allowed middle class residents to f lee city centers, taking their civic involvement and tax dollars with them, and that the growth of urban sprawl has destroyed farmland, greatly increased the demand for a limited supply of energy and has contributed to greenhouse gas emissions and global warming. Many of these individuals see this as the triumph of private interests over the collective public interest.

They call for measures that would limit the use of private automobiles and boost ridership of public transportation. They would do this by redistributing money that now goes to roads and highways to public transportation systems. They also advocate for land use laws that would boost densities in order to make public transportation more efficient.

The irony in all this is that this dichotomy between small, private vehicles and large, collective public vehicles, may turn out to be an anomaly, an artifact of a particular

moment of urban development between the middle of the 19th and the end of the 20th century. Many of the arguments put forward in this debate are already outmoded. For example, even today the private automobile has become so much more efficient that it uses less energy and emits less greenhouse gas per vehicle mile traveled than the transit bus which is the dominant mode of public transit in the country today. Of course, because the private automobile is generally much faster than public transportation, it has allowed citizens to travel longer distances. Nevertheless, that has not translated into low-density settlement being necessarily more energy intensive than high density settlement.

Furthermore, if we assume for a moment that the trend toward energy efficiency and alternative energy sources continues, we can easily imagine a future not far off when these issues will recede. At that point, the debate can move back to the fundamental issue of how to transport the most passengers in the most efficient, most comfortable and least expensive way.

It appears unlikely that the bus and the railroad train, two big box 19th century transportation solutions, are likely to increase their market share. Instead, an entire range of smaller, personal vehicles running on alternative fuels with built-in navigation devices could well allow for much faster and safer travel on existing infrastructure that will be able to handle an enormously increased amount of traffic. With the advent of shared vehicles and driverless vehicles, it is also possible that most urban dwellers won’t need or want their own vehicles but will summon electronically an appropriately sized vehicle for the purpose at hand, eliminating a vast amount of parking. This would be a true public transportation system but the vehicles would look a lot more like automobiles than buses or trains. It is also likely that the system would be mostly privately owned and operated although with extensive public regulation.

Now, of course, there are enormous hurdles to achieving any of this. And there will be problems, probably problems as important as the ones that we face with our transportation options today.

However, this scenario, as with the jitney episode, does suggest three things. The

“... trying to rebuild our cities at the densities of 19th century industrial cities in order to make public transit work, is probably short-sighted and counter-productive.� first is that trying to rebuild our cities at the densities of 19th century industrial cities in order to make public transit work, is probably short-sighted and counter-productive. A second is that, as with the jitney episode, what is public and what is private is a very f luid and often even contradictory thing.

The final thing is that debates of this kind often lead to sub-optimal solutions. Certainly to date the big debate between private and public transportation in cities has not helped a situation where neither the private nor the public entities has been able or willing to invest in the kind of infrastructure that the country needs to remain competitive and increase productivity.

29

Driving — the Fine Choice of Cultivated Taste!

“Can Public Transport Compete with the Private Car?” by Linda Steg from the Department of Psychology, University of Groningen, The Netherlands 2003/05/21

30

This paper described who drive frequently and why they do so. Further, we explored who may be open to travel by public transport more frequently, and how the use of public transport may be facilitated and stimulated.

Women, younger people, low-income groups and singles use their car relatively less often than do men, older age groups, higher income groups and couples and families. Car use was evaluated much more positively than public transport (except for traffic safety), even in the densely populated Netherlands, were public transport is widely available.

Notably, respondents evaluated almost all car use aspects positively, although the car use is perceived to be expensive and not sexy.

In contrast, the judgements of the public transport aspects are generally negative or neutral, aside from traffic safety. Strikingly, even respondents who hardly drive evaluated car use more positively than travelling by public transport in nearly every respect.

So car use indeed has many individual advantages compared to public transport.

Considering only individual interests, it appears that public transport can hardly compete with the car. However, this does not imply that people cannot be persuaded to travel by public transport more often instead of driving. People may choose to do so out of collective interests, e.g., to safeguard environmental qualities and the quality of urban life. Results of this study indicate indeed that respondents who are concerned about the problems caused by car use evaluate policies aimed at reducing car use as more legitimate, while respondents who are less concerned about these problems more strongly think that the individual freedom to move should not be restricted. Problem awareness was also higher among people who use their car selectively compared to frequent car users. Furthermore, this study focused on the attractiveness of cars and public transport in general. It may well be that in specific situations travelling by public transport is more attractive compared to driving, e.g., the train might be preferred above the car for long distance travel between cities. This suggests that policy makers should not aim at banning people from cars completely, but only at stimulating people to

use their car more selectively and to travel by public transport whenever possible and reasonable. Further, a distinction should be made between various types of public transport. For example, in the Netherlands, people generally especially dislike travelling by bus, while travelling by train is evaluated far more positively. So it might be easier to persuade people to travel by train more often than stimulating them to travel by bus.

It appeared that five dimensions underlie the attractiveness judgements of car use: independence and convenience, the ‘fun’ of car use, control and freedom, kick and status, and negative aspects of car use (i.e., travel costs, traffic unsafety and stress).

Frequent car drivers judge more favourably about all these factors than those who hardly drive. Comparable dimensions underlie the judgements on the attractiveness of public transport, i.e., independence and convenience, the ‘fun’ of public transport, freedom and control, and status and traffic safety. Infrequent car users evaluated these factors most favourably. A Danish study also revealed that frequent car users evaluate car use positively on many different aspects, while only a minority of the respondents had strong positive feelings towards travelling by public transport or cycling. Interestingly, especially the car appeared to be much more than a means of transport (for more than half of these Danish respondents), while cultural and psychological values are hardly connected with travelling by public transport.

These results suggest that car users do not only travel by car because they need to do so, but also because they love driving.

People also prefer to drive a car because of its psychological and cultural meanings.

Motorists can express themselves in the choice of their car and the way they use it and driving a car may cause feelings of control or feelings of superiority over others. Moreover, many people like to drive because they think driving is pleasurable, adventurous, and arousing. So, people also drive because they like to, and not (only) because they have a real utilitarian need for a car or a practical reason to drive. Based on the correlational data presented here, we can not draw conclusions about the causal 31

relationship between the attractiveness of travel modes and actual mode choices. People may drive much because they judge favourably about cars, but they may also have adjusted their opinions to their travel behaviour.

As hypothesised, car use was evaluated as being more important to respondents’ personal life and to society than public transport was.

However, this was only true for frequent car drivers. Respondents who hardly drive think public transport is more important to their personal life and to society than the car is. A study by Sandqvist and Kriström also revealed that especially frequent car users report that the car significantly contributes to their quality of life. Many policy makers think car use can not easily be reduced because car use enhances people’s quality of life and fulfils important societal values. Based on the results of this study, we may conclude that this assumption is only true for frequent car users. People who hardly drive may be better off when the quality of public transport is improved and when car use is reduced. This will very likely improve their quality of life, not only because the personal and societal significance of public transport for them, but also because environmental and urban qualities will probably significantly improve in this case. Further research should address this point in more detail.

As expected, frequent car users are less concerned about the problems caused by car use than are infrequent car users. They also less strongly believe that the government has the right to reduce car use, and they more strongly value the individual freedom to drive than do infrequent car drivers. These results are in line with studies by Stradling et al. 16 and Nilsson and Küller. Stradling et al. 16 found that the more people value the freedom connected to car use, and the more strongly the car contributes to their identity, the less they are willing to reduce their car use.

Nilsson and Küller reported that people who are emotionally attached to their car drive their car more often and evaluate transport policies aimed at reducing car use as less acceptable.

Stimulating public transport use appears not 32

to be an easy task, because public transport seems to be perceived as a poor alternative for car use. Especially fervent car users dislike public transport. For them, the car outperforms public transport on various aspects. They think the car is much more than just a means of transport. It also represents cultural and psychological values, e.g. the car is a symbol of freedom and independence, a status symbol and driving is pleasurable. So, for fervent car users, car use is connected with various important values in modern society.

This may be one of the main reasons why they (more) strongly oppose policies aimed at reducing car use.

Infrequent car users judge somewhat less positively about the car and less negatively about public transport. Consequently, they may be open to use public transport more regularly, especially if they also consider the many problems caused by massive car users.

However, since they already use their car selectively, they may not be able to reduce their car use (even) more. Many efforts are needed to stimulate fervent car use to travel by public transport, because in their view, public transport can surely not compete with their private car. In this case, policies should be aimed at reducing the functional, psychological and cultural values of private cars, as well as at increasing the performances of public transport (and other alternative modes of transport) on these aspects. Next, they should consider the problems of car use when making travel mode choices.

33

Oh, no need to be overly dramatic, Chuck!

34

It’s merely ...

“Alternative Fuels”!

35

Alternative Fuels An alternative fuel vehicle is a vehicle that runs on a fuel other than traditional petroleum fuels (petrol or Diesel fuel); and also refers to any technology of powering an engine that does not involve solely petroleum (e.g. electric car, hybrid electric vehicles, solar powered). Because of a combination of factors, such as environmental concerns, high oil prices and the potential for peak oil, development of cleaner alternative fuels and advanced power systems for vehicles has become a high priority for many governments and vehicle manufacturers around the world.

HYDROGEN Hydrogen, when used to generate electricity through a fuel cell, is an emissions-free alternative fuel that can be produced from diverse domestic energy sources. Research and commercial efforts are under way to build the hydrogen fueling infrastructure and produce hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles that are practical for widespread use.

ELECTRICITY Electricity can be used to power all-electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. These vehicles can draw electricity directly from the grid and other off-board electrical power sources and store it in batteries.

Hybrid electric vehicles use electricity to boost fuel efficiency. Using electricity to power vehicles can have significant energy security and emissions benefits.

PROPANE Propane, also known as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) or propane autogas, has been used worldwide as a vehicle fuel for decades. It is stored as a liquid, and propane fueling infrastructure is widespread.

ETHANOL Ethanol is a renewable fuel made from corn and other plant materials.

The use of ethanol is widespread, and approximately 97% of gasoline in the U.S. contains some ethanol. The most common blend of ethanol is E10 (10% ethanol, 90% gasoline). Ethanol is also available as E85 (or f lex fuel)—a high-level ethanol blend containing 51%-83% ethanol depending on season and geography—for use in f lexible fuel vehicles. E15 is defined by the Environmental Protection Agency as a blend of 10.5%-15% ethanol with gasoline. It is an approved ethanol blend for use in model year 2001 and newer light-duty conventional vehicles.

36

BIODIESEL Biodiesel is a domestically produced, renewable fuel that can be manufactured from vegetable oils, animal fats, or recycled restaurant grease for use in diesel vehicles. Biodiesel’s physical properties are similar to those of petroleum diesel, but it is a cleaner-burning alternative.

NATURAL GAS Natural gas, a domestically produced gaseous fuel, is readily available through the utility infrastructure. Whether produced via conventional or renewable methods, this clean-burning alternative fuel must be compressed or liquefied for use in vehicles.

37

Emerging Fuels Several emerging alternative fuels are under development or already developed and may be available in the United States. These fuels may increase energy security, reduce emissions, improve vehicle performance, and stimulate the U.S. economy.

Some of these emerging fuels are considered alternative fuels under the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and may qualify for federal and state incentives and laws:

BIOBUTANOL Butanol, a 4-carbon alcohol (butyl alcohol), is generally used as an industrial solvent in products such as lacquers and enamels. However, it can also be blended with gasoline and used as a transportation fuel.

Butanol is commonly produced using fossil fuels, but it can also be produced from biomass, in which case it is called biobutanol. Biobutanol is produced from the same feedstocks as ethanol—corn, sugar beets, and other types of biomass. Biobutanol is a renewable fuel and qualifies under the Renewable Fuel Standard; the category depends on the feedstock used for production.

DIMETHYL ETHER Dimethyl ether (DME) is a synthetically produced alternative to diesel for use in specially designed compression ignition diesel engines.

Under normal atmospheric conditions, DME is a colorless gas. It is used extensively in the chemical industry and as an aerosol propellant.

Dimethyl ether requires about 75 pounds per square inch (psi) of pressure to be in liquid form. Because of this, DME’s handling requirements are similar to those of propane—both must be kept in pressurized storage tanks at ambient temperature.

METHANOL Methanol (CH3OH), also known as wood alcohol, is considered an alternative fuel under the Energy Policy Act of 1992. As an engine fuel, methanol has chemical and physical fuel properties similar to ethanol.

Methanol use in vehicles has declined dramatically since the early 1990s, and automakers no longer manufacture methanol vehicles in the United States.

38

RENEWABLE HYDROCARBON BIOFUELS Renewable hydrocarbon biofuels (also called “green� hydrocarbons, biohydrocarbons, drop-in biofuels, and sustainable or advanced hydrocarbon biofuels) are fuels produced from biomass sources through a variety of biological and thermochemical processes. These products are similar to petroleum gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel in chemical makeup and are therefore considered infrastructure-compatible fuels. They can be used in vehicles without engine modifications and can utilize existing petroleum distribution systems.

Additional fuels, such as AMMONIA, may also meet the criteria for alternative fuels when used in limited quantities. More research is needed to characterize the impacts of these fuels, such as necessary vehicle modifications, required fueling infrastructure, human health impacts, greenhouse gas emissions, and tailpipe emissions.

39

AH-H-H ... the Sweet Smell of a Smart New Car! “Will Driverless Cars Solve Our Energy Problems—or Just Create New Ones?”

by Brad Plumer for the Washington Post 2013/03/30

40

Self-driving cars are all the rage these days. Companies like Google are building vehicles that can drive themselves with sensors and algorithms. Futurists are raving about how this will revolutionize transportation: fewer accidents, easier parking... It’s reached the point where even Newt Gingrich is offering a “short course” on driverless cars.

And that got us wondering. If selfdriving cars ever do become the future of transportation, what would that mean for energy, oil use and climate change in the decades ahead?

Some backdrop: Last week, the National Academy of Sciences released a big report on how the United States could cut gasoline use and transport emissions 80 percent by 2050 — a key step toward addressing global warming and U.S. oil dependency. It would be difficult, the report said, but a big push on electric vehicles, advanced biofuels and efficiency could get us there.

In a follow-up post, David Roberts criticized the NAS for thinking too prosaically.

The report assumed our transportation system would look basically the same in 2050, only

with somewhat cleaner vehicles. And that might well be wrong. What if self-driving cars become ubiquitous and utterly transform the way we get around? The task of getting off oil and curbing emissions could be much easier — or much harder — than anyone thinks.

Now, a future filled with driverless cars might be far-fetched, but it’s interesting to ponder. So here are a few very speculative thoughts on how self-driving cars could conceivably affect energy use in the decades ahead — assuming they ever catch on: Driverless cars will be far more fuelefficient. That’s the idea, anyway, laid out in this report from KPMG. Once we no longer need clumsy human drivers, then self-driving cars and trucks will be able to bunch close together at steadier speeds. Traffic jams and accidents will become a thing of the past. The robots will be driving as efficiently as possible.

The hope is that this could save thousands of lives. It could also have massive effects on energy use. The Rocky Mountain Institute estimates that the reduction in wind drag alone from vehicles traveling closely together could reduce fuel use 20 percent to 30 percent.

Driverless vehicles could also, in theory be much, much lighter — since collisions will no longer be a big concern. Cars that currently weigh 4,000 pounds could one day weigh just 750 pounds. That development alone there would nearly double energy efficiency.

Driverless cars will waste less fuel on things like looking for parking. One MIT study found that in congested urban areas, about 40 percent of total gasoline use in cars is spent as drivers look for parking. Presumably, intelligent self-driving cars wouldn’t have this problem.

Driverless cars will make car-sharing more popular, which will mean fewer vehicles on the road. Lots of self-driving-car enthusiasts have argued that car-sharing will be a popular model — after all, most privately owned cars are currently parked and idle 90 percent of the time. Wouldn’t it make more sense for the self-driving car to make itself useful during that period? Car-sharing could mean fewer cars overall.

Driverless cars will make the transition to electric vehicles easier. Lighter, more efficient cars will be able to go much farther 41

on a single battery charge, which means that “range anxiety” will be less of an issue for plug-ins.

Driverless cars will increase the appeal of walking and biking. Since self-driving cars will (in theory) be much, much safer than human drivers, it’ll be less dangerous to bike on the road. At the margins, that could be a boon to pedestrians.

Cities will become more appealing. If traffic gets less crazy, if walking and biking become more attractive, and if parking is no longer a huge hassle, denser urban living might become more attractive. Since cities tend to be more energy-efficient than the suburbs, that could reduce energy use. (Although see below for a counterpoint.)

The f lip side: How driverless cars could lead to a huge surge in energy demand.

More and more people will drive.

Think about all the people who are not allowed to drive right now. Everyone under 16. The elderly. The disabled. People who are intoxicated or on medication. People who are sleeping. That’s a huge portion of the population. And all of those people will be able to ride in driverless cars. And that means we could see many more car trips.

That’s a huge plus for mobility. But it also has big energy implications. At the moment, vehicle miles-traveled in the United States appears to have peaked back in 2005 — in part because fewer and fewer young people

42

are getting their licenses and driving. Could self-driving cars reverse that trend?

Public transportation could lose its appeal. If driverless cars or driverless taxis catch on, then trains and buses could find themselves displaced. You can read or zone out in a driverless car just as easily as you can on the subway. Depending on how this all shakes out, it could mean more driving and higher energy demands.

Urban sprawl could greatly expand.

Arielle Duhaime-Ross has a good post on this. Right now, there’s a serious limit to how sprawled-out a city can get — people tend to prefer to keep their commutes under an hour.

But if driverless cars can offer quick, efficient transportation, then we could see more people spread out to the suburbs. It’s possible this could mean bigger environmental effects.

(That said, it would be a big gain for public health if commuting became less stressful and arduous.)

Cars might need to be replaced more frequently. If car-sharing became widespread, then driverless cars would be on the road and in motion far more often. This might mean cars would have a lifespan similar to that of police vehicles, about three to five years, rather than their current 11 years. It’s hard to say what this would mean for energy use — cars could be upgraded more quickly as new technology became available — but it’s another angle here.

The Road to Autonomy VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE INTEGRATION (VII) is an initiative fostering research and applications development for a series of technologies directly linking road vehicles to their physical surroundings, first and foremost in order to improve road safety. The technology draws on several disciplines, including transport engineering, electrical engineering, automotive engineering, and computer science. VII specifically covers road transport although similar technologies are in place or under development for other modes of transport. Planes, for example, use ground-based beacons for automated guidance, allowing the autopilot to f ly the plane without human intervention. In highway engineering, improving the safety of a roadway can enhance overall efficiency. VII targets improvements in both safety and efficiency.

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS) are advanced applications which, without embodying intelligence as such, aim to provide innovative services relating to different modes of transport and traffic management and enable various users to be better informed and make safer, more coordinated, and ‘smarter’ use of transport networks. They are considered a part of the Internet of things.

Although ITS may refer to all modes of transport, EU Directive 2010/40/EU (7 July 2010) defined ITS as systems in which information and communication technologies are applied in the field of road transport, including infrastructure, vehicles and users, and in traffic management and mobility management, as well as for interfaces with other modes of transport.

An AUTOMATED HIGHWAY SYSTEM (AHS) or Smart Road is a proposed intelligent transportation system technology designed to provide for driverless cars on specific rights-ofway. It is most often recommended as a means of traffic congestion relief, on the grounds that it would drastically reduce following distances and headway, thus allowing a given stretch of road to carry more cars.

In one scheme, the roadway has magnetized stainless-steel spikes driven one meter apart in its center. The car senses the spikes to measure its speed and locate the center of the lane.

Furthermore, the spikes can have either magnetic north or magnetic south facing up. The roadway thus provides small amounts of digital data describing interchanges, recommended speeds, etc.

The cars have power steering and automatic speed controls, which are controlled by a computer.

The cars organize themselves into platoons of eight to twenty-five cars. The platoons drive themselves a meter apart, so that air resistance is minimized. The distance between platoons is the conventional braking distance.

The SARTRE PROJECT (Safe Road Trains for the Environment), is a European Commission funded project investigating implementation of platooning on unmodified European motorways.

The project begun in September 2009, and vehicle platooning, as envisaged by the SARTRE project, is a convoy of vehicles in which a professional driver in a lead vehicle heads a line of closely following vehicles. Each following vehicle autonomously measures the distance, speed and direction and adjusts to the vehicle in front. Once in the platoon, drivers can do other things while the platoon proceeds towards its long-haul destination. All vehicles are detached and can leave the procession at any time.

43

Notable Concept Cars A concept car (also known as concept vehicle, show vehicle or prototype) is a car made to showcase new styling and/or new technology. They are often shown at motor shows to gauge customer reaction to new and radical designs which may or may not be mass-produced. General Motors designer Harley Earl is generally credited with inventing the concept car, and did much to popularize it through its traveling Motorama shows of the 1950s.

ALFA ROMEO BAT CARS 1950s aerodynamic studies by Bertone.

ASTON MARTIN ATOM Designed in 1939 by Claude Hill. Fully functional and still in roadworthy condition, it was adopted by Aston Martin owner David Brown into a racing car that won outright at the 1948 Spa 24 Hours and became the basis for the DB1.

BMW GINA

BMW GINA A fabric-skinned shape-shifting sports car. This platform (aside from the body material and changing shape) was adopted in 2012 for the BMW i3 and BMW i8 Electric Vehicles.

BUICK Y-JOB Designed in the late 1930s by the famous General Motors designer Harley Earl. Considered by most to be the first concept car. Inspired many other Buick vehicles, including the Buick Blackhawk Concept.

GENERAL MOTORS LE SABRE Built by Harley Earl in 1951, it helped introduce 12 volt electrics and the aluminum 215 ci V8 to GM. This nameplate was transferred over to be a production vehicle.

CADILLAC CYCLONE Built in 1959, it is one of Harley Earl’s last designs. Its futuristic styling was heavily inf luenced by 1950’s aviation and rocketry.

Cadillac Cyclone 44

CADILLAC DEBUTANTE Considered the most luxurious car ever built, the Cadillac Debutante came with leopard skin interior with a 24 karat gold instrument panel and fittings.

CHEVROLET CORVETTE MAKO SHARK Previewed the design of the 1968–1982 production Corvette.

Chevrolet Corvette Mako Shark

CHEVROLET VOLT One of the first plug-in hybrid electric vehicle concept cars. This vehicle was launched with limited availability in certain states in early 2011, with availability in all of the United States, as well as parts of Europe by the end of 2012. The production car is the successor to the failed GM EV1, originally leased through Saturn dealerships.

CHEVROLET CORVAIR MONZA GT 1962 mid-engined experimental prototype.

DODGE TOMAHAWK A 2003 V10-powered four-wheel motorcycle-like design that drew attention for its audacity, and the debunked claim that it could hypothetically reach speeds of 300 to 420 mph (480 to 680 km/h).

FERRARI MODULO Designed by Paolo Martin of the Italian carozzeria Pininfarina, unveiled at the 1970 Geneva Motor Show.

FORD NUCLEON A nuclear-powered car.

Dodge Tomahawk

FORD PROBE A series of four designs between 1979 and 1983 of which the Probe III was eventually developed into the Ford Sierra.

FORD SYNUS First shown in 2005. This design was developed to explore the creation of an ultra-safe roadgoing environment.

GENERAL MOTORS FIREBIRD A series of gas turbine-powered cars. Pontiac adopted this nameplate based on the Chevrolet Camaro. The nameplate was retired in 2002, along with the Chevrolet Camaro, which was revived in 2010.

GM Firebird

HOLDEN EFIJY Based around the Holden FJ, named the United States concept car of the year for 2007.

LANCIA MEGAGAMMA The prototype for the modern MPV (minivan).

Lancia Megagamma

LE-ECO LESEE The LeSee is meant to be used in a f leet setting so you can summon it with a smartphone to autonomously pick you up. The car comes with a host of advanced features, like a steering wheel that can retract into the dashboard and infotainment displays for rear passengers.

45

MERCEDES BIOME The Biome would be grown in a lab rather than built on a production line.

This vision includes growing a material called BioFibre which would be lighter than metal or plastic, yet stronger than steel. The resulting car would weighs in at 875.5 lbs (around 394 kg). The entire vehicle would also be completely biodegradable. The car would only emit oxygen.

Mercedes Biome

MERCEDES BENZ F700 Its PRE-SCAN road scanning suspension allows you to not feel any bumps and humps on the road (developed later into Magic Body Control). This design will lead to the development of the next-generation MercedesBenz A-Class, Mercedes-Benz B-Class, and Mercedes-Benz C-Class.

MIT CAR The Massachusetts Institute of Technology concept car with Frank Gehry.

PHANTOM CORSAIR A 1930s concept car, developed by Rust Heinz.

MIT Car

PONTIAC BONNEVILLE SPECIAL Pontiac’s first 2-seater sportscar that debuted at the 1954 Motorama.

This nameplate carried over to a Pontiac sports car of the 1950s.

PONTIAC CLUB DE MER Pontiac’s all stainless steel sportscar that debuted at the 1956 Motorama.

PORSCHE 989 Porsche’s first 4-door car, a predecessor of the Porsche Panamera.

ROLLS-ROYCE 1EX The first in a series of ‘experimental models’, the 1EX was built by Rolls Royce in 1919 on a 40/50 h.p. chassis to test and develop their cars.

Individual EX models were produced for over 40 years ending with the 45EX in 1958.The Ghost name Rolls Royce Ghost was adopted in 2011 as a production vehicle. 1EX was also used for the concept version of this Rolls-Royce vehicle.

ROLLS-ROYCE VISION 100 A completely autonomous car without steering controls.

Rolls-Royce Vision 100’s Interior

46

TOYOTA UBOX Made to appeal to the Generation Z in terms of design and ergonomics, the uBox’s interior is entirely customizable so the seats can be moved to transform it into a mobile office or fit more people.

VOLKSWAGEN BUDD-E The microbus can drive up to 373 miles on a single charge, according to Volkswagen. The microbus’ massive dashboard display can be controlled with hand gestures. The BUDD-e‘s interface also allows drivers to control things like the temperature and lighting in their house.

VOLVO VESC Used as testbed in the development of safety features incorporated into the Volvo 240 series cars, used by the NHTSA as a basis for later safety standards, including self-retracting three-point seatbelts, crumple zones, head restraints, rollover protection, and shock-absorbing zerodamage bumpers.

Volvo VESC

47

That’s Not a Car — it’s a “Computer on Wheels”!

“Elon Musk: Model S Not a Car but a ‘Sophisticated Computer on Wheels’” by Jerry Hirsch for the L.A. Times 2015/03/19

48

In a move that demonstrates how the mechanical and electronic worlds are converging, Tesla Motors plans to update many of its Model S sedans with functions that include automatic braking when the vehicle senses a pending collision, a partial autopilot system, and even a robotic parking program that will tuck a car into its garage while its owner watches from the porch.

With the exception of robotic parking, Mercedes-Benz, Audi, Acura and other luxury brands already offer cars with these options. But those features were built into the cars before they were purchased. What’s different with Tesla is its ability to remotely add substantial functions to cars that it has already sold. The autopilot safety features are available to the Model S with the hardware that started being built into cars last October.

Since the invention of the automobile more than a century ago, consumers were pretty much stuck with the car they purchased. They could make some changes in tires, tuning and suspension that could improve the performance of the vehicle. But doing anything big such as adding features

or getting more power out of the engine involved the complex and often expensive swapping of parts—or trading up to a more expensive model.

Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk may be overturning those conventions.

“We really designed the Model S to be a very sophisticated computer on wheels,” Musk said Thursday, while announcing software updates for his Model S. “Tesla is a software company as much as it is a hardware company. A huge part of what Tesla is, is a Silicon Valley software company. We view this the same as updating your phone or your laptop.”

Analysts agreed, saying Tesla is taking a design approach that looks at a vehicle as an electronic device rather than a machine.

Cars will become platforms for apps that can change or improve their functions rather than having their performance frozen in place at the time of purchase. “You are seeing a convergence of the car and the mobile phone,” said Efraim Levy, auto industry analyst at S&P Capital IQ. Musk announced the anticipated

changes during a teleconference at which he also unveiled software updates that allow the car to scan the locations of all Tesla charging stations and tell drivers exactly how far it is to the best one, and then recommend the best route for getting there. Musk said this app will relieve “range anxiety,” or fear that a car will run out of electricity before it reaches a destination where it can be recharged. Older cars will also get these features.

The Model S electric sports sedans will receive the free software updates through a wireless link embedded in the cars. “This is one of the ways that Tesla shows off its innovation and it is in the direction that consumers increasingly expect,” Levy said.

“Technology changes and they get upgrades.”

Musk said the major updates will start in about three months. He plans continued software changes every three to four months.

“Most cars don’t improve over time, but the Models S gets faster and better as time passes,” he said.

Tesla also is using a software update to improve radio reception and the sound system in its cars.

49

With the safety functions, the car company is taking advantage of a suite of sensors already installed on the vehicles to create software that will trigger the brakes if the computers believe the car is about to have a collision. It will also offer a system that alerts drivers to whether there is a vehicle in a blind spot when they want to change lanes.

The rapid advances in robotic driving prompted a consumer group Thursday to issue a safety warning and ask the California Department of Motor Vehicles to resist pressure from automotive and technology companies to quickly write rules for selfdriving cars. “Safety issues are paramount, of course, but there are other substantial questions about privacy, data security and insurance that are also raised by driverless cars. The DMV regulations now being written governing the public use of autonomous vehicles should ref lect these important questions as well,” Consumer Watchdog wrote in a letter to the state agency.

Consumer Watchdog said it was primarily targeting Google’s driverless car technology, which includes car-like 50

transport pods that don’t include steering wheels or controls that would allow a human to take control of the vehicles. But the group also mentioned a host of safety concerns. It said that heavy rain and snow could interfere with the sensors that govern the autopilot function. It questioned whether the sensors would be able to correctly read hand signals given by the human driver of another vehicle, or a policeman using only hand signals to direct traffic.

“It is possible, perhaps even likely, that the technology needed to manufacture vehicles that operate ‘autonomously’ with 100% safety will eventually be perfected,” the group said. “In the meantime, under any realistic scenario for the near or even distant future, human drivers will be responsible for maintaining control of their vehicle in order to prevent an accident.”

51

52