Читать книгу Autonomy: The Quest to Build the Driverless Car - And How It Will Reshape Our World - Lawrence Burns - Страница 7

I can’t understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I’m frightened of the old ones.

—JOHN CAGE

The way we get around is changing. For the first time in 130 years, we’re in the midst of a major transformation in automobile transportation. In contrast to the personally owned, gasoline-powered, human-driven vehicles that have dominated the last century, we’re transitioning to mobility services based on electric-powered and driverless vehicles, paid for by trip or through subscriptions.

What does this mean? Soon, many of us will no longer need to own or drive a car. Instead, we will rely on services that safely and conveniently use autonomous vehicles to take us where we want to go. The providers will manage every aspect of our transportation experiences, from vehicle parking to cleaning and maintenance to recharging. The hassles of car ownership will be eliminated. No longer will we need to shop for, finance and insure a car, or spend our time driving, parking or pumping gas. Traffic will be less of a headache. And we will be able to choose between riding in shared vehicles that also serve others or paying more to have an exclusive autonomous “valet” that not only takes us door to door when we want, but also can be dispatched to run errands or transport family and friends.

Summoning a ride will happen with the touch of an app. The vehicle that arrives won’t have a steering wheel or gas and brake pedals. Most trips will happen in electric vehicles tailored to comfortably seat two people, since most trips we make happen solo or with just one other person. All this—and transportation is going to cost us just a fraction of what it ever did before.

This book chronicles the origins of the coming transformation. The changes I describe use current technology to solve the transportation problem in a different way. We don’t often consider transportation a problem, but it is. Without giving it much thought, every day, every one of us considers the dilemma of how to get where we want to go when we want to be there. We come up with various solutions. For more than a century, the predominant solution in North America has been the personally owned, gas-powered, human-operated automobile. But that particular answer has caused numerous issues.

Today in the United States, 212 million licensed drivers own 252 million light-duty vehicles and drive 3.2 trillion miles a year, burning more than 180 billion gallons of fuel as they do. The emissions of cars and trucks amount to a fifth of the greenhouse gases created in the United States. And the distance we travel by automobile is growing, with the number of vehicle miles traveled increasing about 50 percent from 1990 to 2016.

We’ve structured our transportation in such a manner that most working adults believe that owning and maintaining their own vehicles is integral to their full participation in contemporary society. Yet, American automobiles sit unused about 95 percent of the time.

When we do drive those vehicles, they’re terribly inefficient. More than 95 percent of the automobiles sold in the United States today are propelled by internal combustion engines that use gasoline. Less than 30 percent of the energy from the gasoline you put in your car is used to move it down the road. The rest of the energy is wasted as heat and sound, or used to power accessories like headlights, radios and air conditioners. Because typical vehicles weigh around 3,000 pounds and typical people weigh around 150 pounds, only about 5 percent of the gasoline energy translated into motion is used to move the driver, which amounts to just 1.5 percent of the total energy in gasoline.

Such inefficiencies arise because we purchase automobiles that are massively overbuilt for the purposes we most frequently use them. Waymo CEO John Krafcik calls this the “occasional-use imperative.” Think about it. In the United States, 85 percent of personal travel is by automobile. Average occupancy of 1.7 people per mile falls to just 1.1 in vehicles conducting work commutes. Average speed in congested cities can run as low as 12 mph. And yet the cars, trucks and SUVs we drive have enough room for at least five adults, with engines so powerful many can travel at 120 mph and beyond. “The mix of cars on our nation’s roadways is completely messed up,” Krafcik observes.

These overbuilt vehicles are dangerous, because they’re heavy. The World Health Organization estimates that auto crashes around the world kill 1.3 million people a year. In 2016 alone, 37,461 Americans were killed in auto crashes, contributing to make unintentional injuries the leading cause of death for Americans in the first half of life.

Using your vehicles just 5 percent of the time means that you have to figure out a place to store them the other 95 percent. So, you need to devote a good chunk of your home to a garage (and driveway), and not only that—where you work has to reserve space for your car, too. As does your favorite shopping mall, your dentist’s office, the stadium for your favorite sports team, your city’s streets—the list goes on. So we pave over big swathes of valuable real estate in our cities, creating asphalt heat islands that elevate urban temperatures and may contribute to climate change.

All of which is why Morgan Stanley financial analyst Adam Jonas calls the automobile “the world’s most underutilized asset” and the auto industry “the most disruptable business on earth.” It’s why Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Edward Humes says, “In almost every way imaginable, the car, as it is deployed and used today, is insane.”

I couldn’t agree more. Thankfully, we’ve entered a period that is moving us toward a saner transportation solution—one of those rare disruptions that will improve the way life happens for decades, and perhaps for centuries, to come. This transformation will occur because it allows people to get around at lower cost more conveniently. Happily, the solution also happens to be better for the earth.

Many of the key players in the disruption turned to their work after a moment of extreme frustration with automobiles and the system they’ve spawned. For example, consider Google cofounder Larry Page, who, fatefully, did not have a car when he attended the University of Michigan as an undergraduate.

Page studied at the University of Michigan from 1991 to 1995 to get his bachelor’s degree in computer engineering. He had a strong personal connection to the school; his grandfather, an autoworker for General Motors in Flint’s Chevrolet plant, had driven Page’s father and aunt around the Ann Arbor campus of the University of Michigan and told the children that they would one day attend the place. Both did. Page’s father also met Page’s mother there. So it was almost inevitable that Page himself would attend U of M.

Ann Arbor is a pleasant place in the spring, summer and fall, full of trees and rolling hills, student cyclists and joggers, the landscape dominated by the green of natural vegetation and the so-called maize and blue that are the school’s official colors.

But in winter, the campus turns into a difficult place to be outside. Few people get around by bicycle between December and March because Michigan winters can be brutal. The landlocked campus is far from any temperature-buffering major body of water. Darkness falls by 5:00 P.M., and the cold is omnipresent. The sidewalks can feature slush and sleet in early winter, which then harden into black ice come January and February.

The other thing about Ann Arbor is that traffic can be terrible. In summer, it’s bad. In winter, when the snowdrifts freeze into iron berms that narrow the already traffic-clogged roads, the car congestion and parking woes grow even worse. Those who don’t have automobiles are forced to ride the bus, which arrives irregularly, and sometimes not at all.

Page would get out of one of his afternoon engineering courses and head to the bus stop and wait, shivering, looking down the road hoping to spy the distinctive headlight pattern of the buses used by the local transit authority. While automobiles passed by, their individual drivers embedded in little cocoons of warmth, Page would huddle in the shelter and hope for the arrival of a ride that never seemed to come, and he would think about how poorly we as a society had solved the transportation problem.

Consequently, Page became obsessed with alternative solutions. Those interminable minutes that Page spent waiting for the bus in the Michigan winter convinced him to draft, as a U of M student, an idea for a personal rapid-transportation system, an interconnected monorail on which two-person mobility pods were available on a moment’s notice to ferry riders wherever they wished. Those frigid minutes also encouraged Page to join U of M’s solar-car racing team—after all, cars that ran on free solar power would presumably make transportation more affordable to everyone. Finally, those minutes were a factor in Page considering to pursue, as a graduate student at Stanford in the late nineties, autonomous-car development rather than the world-changing search-engine project on which he eventually landed. And they spurred Page’s interest in the desert and urban challenges that the U.S. military’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) staged in California in 2004, 2005 and 2007. Those challenges led directly to the decision by Page and his partner, Sergey Brin, to fund Google’s Chauffeur self-driving car project (now called Waymo), which convinced the world that autonomous vehicles were not just possible, but inevitable, and a lot sooner than many people expected.

My moment of greatest frustration with the old solution happened in Germany, where I was attending Frankfurt’s 2001 International Motor Show. At the time, I was General Motors’ corporate vice president of research, development and planning, and a member of CEO Rick Wagoner’s thirteen-person strategy board, which was responsible for making the automaker’s biggest decisions.

In Frankfurt, I was heading back to my hotel when my cell phone rang. It was GM security, which was unusual. What was even more unusual was the tension in the caller’s voice. The security officer said he could not get into the details, but that as soon as I arrived at the hotel I was to proceed to a specific conference room.

I’d never received a call like that.

When I entered the conference room, several other GM Automotive Strategy Board members were present and the TV was turned on. I could see on the screen that one of the World Trade Center towers was on fire. Minutes later I watched a jetliner fly into the second tower.

It took three days before I was able to get home from Germany. I did a lot of thinking as those days passed. Many theories exist to explain why the attacks occurred. But it’s impossible to ignore that one contributing factor was U.S. dependence on oil imported from the Middle East.

I couldn’t help but feel as though the auto industry bore some blame for what happened. America was dependent on foreign oil because we needed it to power the cars and trucks that GM produced. Our customers enjoyed great freedom with GM products. But, I asked myself, was this freedom worth the price? For me, 9/11 screamed that the status quo of the auto industry, dominated as it was by gas-powered combustion engines, was unacceptable. And thanks to my job leading GM’s R&D, I was in a position to do something about this. In fact, I felt like it was my responsibility to accelerate the development of alternatives to the current transportation system.

Soon, I developed a profile as the highest-ranked Detroit auto executive pulling for wholesale reform of America’s automobile-based transportation system. (As I recall, the only other person in Detroit who was talking about the problems in the same way was William Clay Ford, Jr.)

Oil dependence, safety issues, traffic congestion and global warming—these and other ills were solvable, I argued in speeches and articles, if only we’d transform the auto industry. I focused on redefining the “design DNA” of automobiles based on electric drive and computerized controls, and I illustrated what was possible with the now renowned GM Autonomy concept car, which debuted at the 2002 North American International Auto Show in Detroit. (Autonomy was based on a skateboard-like platform similar to what underlies today’s Tesla models.) I also steered GM toward a portfolio of alternative-propulsion systems based on hydrogen fuel cells, advanced batteries and biofuels, and arranged for GM to sponsor Carnegie Mellon’s Team Tartan, which won the DARPA Urban Challenge by creating a robot version of a Chevy Tahoe. And as GM and its competitors fought to survive the 2008–2009 recession, I pushed to develop an autonomous, shareable and electric concept vehicle, the GM EN-V, that foresaw our self-driving future.

Those were the auto industry’s darkest days, and while GM and Chrysler went bankrupt, and Ford mortgaged itself to narrowly avoid the same fate, a handful of auto industry outsiders began to challenge Detroit’s dominance in a stunning convergence of new technology and innovative business models. This was the period in which Google gathered together the brightest engineering talent from the DARPA challenges and launched its Chauffeur self-driving car project. Upstart Tesla delivered its first Roadster in 2008, highlighting the promise of electric vehicles with outstanding performance using lithium-ion batteries. And shortly after that, scrappy start-ups Uber and Lyft, among others, established an enormous market for ride sharing and began the decoupling of people from personal ownership of automobiles. While Detroit was fighting for its life, the seeds of the mobility revolution were being planted by companies from outside the auto industry, by players with a bone-deep understanding of digital technology and a passion for designing and delivering compelling transportation experiences.

I left GM soon after the 2009 bankruptcy and, among other new positions, became the director of the Program on Sustainable Mobility at Columbia University, working out of economist Jeff Sachs’s Earth Institute. There, I initiated the first research project to examine the economic implications of a future that saw transportation disrupted by three separate but related factors—shared-use vehicles, powered by electric motors, and driven autonomously. While each individual factor promised significant change, I was more interested in what would result when they converged. The expert math modeler Bill Jordan and I calculated in 2011 that the deployment of such an integrated system could reduce the annual costs of automobile travel in the U.S. alone by $4 trillion—about the same amount as the entire budget of the federal government. More to the point, our research suggested that driverless electric vehicles tailor-designed for shared transportation service in U.S. cities could reduce the out-of-pocket and time costs of conventional automobile travel by more than 80 percent (from $1.50 per mile to $0.25 per mile)—while providing safer and more convenient mobility.

Soon after I began that work I was recruited by Chauffeur’s project leader, Sebastian Thrun, and engineering lead, Chris Urmson, as an adviser, a role I continue to hold today. In my eighth year at what is now called Waymo, advising one of the most exciting endeavors in engineering history, I feel lucky to have had the opportunity to work with Sebastian, Chris and such fascinating characters as Anthony Levandowski, Bryan Salesky, Mike Montemerlo, Dmitri Dolgov and Adam Frost, as well as Waymo CEO John Krafcik.

In 2018, Waymo achieved the realization of a dream that first gathered the team together in 2009—the deployment of autonomous, shared, electric vehicles. And the number of major companies testing these vehicles everywhere from Miami to San Francisco to New York City is now approaching the dozens. Self-driving cars equipped with electric motors and deployed in a transportation-service model are poised to become the biggest thing to hit the automobile industry since the invention of the automobile itself. We are entering a new age of automobility, which redefines the freedom provided by today’s automobiles, promising better mobility for more people at lower cost. The implications are profound, not just in terms of how our lives will change, but also for the automobile industry and everything it touches.

The resultant disruption will transform the way we live, the way we get around and the way we do business. It will virtually eliminate automobile crashes, radically decreasing the number of deaths they cause every year. It will decrease the cost of long-haul trucking by about 50 percent—a remarkable productivity-improvement opportunity and amplifier of e-commerce growth, and a profoundly upsetting prospect for the millions of employees and small-business owners who earn their living as drivers. The financial implications are compelling for the auto manufacturers, who will transition their business models from selling millions of vehicles to millions of different customers and instead operate massive fleets of self-driving taxis in population centers around the world. Today, the average net income per vehicle sold by most auto companies ranges from $1,000 to $5,000. In contrast, a transportation service vehicle with, for example, a 300,000-mile wear cycle earning just $0.10 per mile makes a lifetime profit of $30,000. (The 300,000-mile figure is based on the approximate lifetime of taxicabs with internal combustion and hybrid electric engines.)

This book is the story of the loosely connected visionaries who saw something was possible before others, how their visions have come to be and how this future will reshape our world. For their optimism, these few spent years being disparaged as futurists, as impractical dreamers, as kids playing in a sandbox—until suddenly, in the fall of 2015 and the spring of 2016, the industry recognized that the future the visionaries described wasn’t just possible. It was practical and desirable, and coming sooner than anyone might have ever thought.

How these men and women pulled off that transition is a remarkable story—one filled with complex alliances and betrayals. It includes miracles of engineering and accidents of mechanics. Remarkable feats of software programming and quite a few questionable acts. Great sacrifice is made, as well as, eventually, wealth. There are heroes and villains, and a lot of characters residing somewhere in between.

The tale could feature many beginnings. You could say that it began at the 1939 World’s Fair, where the General Motors pavilion provided a prescient version of a world much like the one we’re approaching. I hope at least part of it began when I became head of GM’s research and development, and CEO Rick Wagoner challenged me to reinvent the automobile. You could set the start of the sharing chapter near Boston, where Robin Chase cofounded Zipcar. The electric vehicle aspect started in Palo Alto, California, where Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning, fresh off successfully selling one start-up, decided the new lithium-ion batteries deserved a shot in an automobile—and brought in an investor named Elon Musk.

But ultimately it was the autonomous end of this disruptive trinity that kick-started the transformation. Maybe that started coming true with the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, which in turn triggered a series of wars that spurred an obscure arm of the U.S. government, DARPA, to organize the challenges that ultimately set these dominoes in motion. But I’m not going to start this story at DARPA’s home in Arlington County, Virginia. Rather, I’ll start with the engineering student who probably sacrificed the most out of everyone—and who, going on fifteen years later, may turn out to be one of the ones who have gained the most, as well.

This story is going to start with Chris Urmson.