National Academies Press: OpenBook

A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles (2016)

Chapter: IX. SUSTAINABILITY: LAND USE, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES

« Previous: VIII. LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY ISSUES
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"IX. SUSTAINABILITY: LAND USE, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23453.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"IX. SUSTAINABILITY: LAND USE, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23453.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"IX. SUSTAINABILITY: LAND USE, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23453.
×
Page 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"IX. SUSTAINABILITY: LAND USE, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23453.
×
Page 77
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"IX. SUSTAINABILITY: LAND USE, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23453.
×
Page 78

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

74 In addition, legislative and regulatory jurisdiction over motor vehicles is diffused in the United States between the states and the federal government. At such a time of technical and political uncertainty, a certain degree of regulatory flexibility seems appro- priate so as to avoid setting legislative or regulatory requirements too rigidly or too soon, before best practices and designs may have emerged. At this early stage in the development of driverless vehicles, there appears to be regulatory wisdom in leaving options and opportunities for further development and innovation open. IX. SUSTAINABILITY: LAND USE, ENVIRON- MENTAL, AND INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES Widespread deployment of driverless vehicles will affect the sustainability of land, environmental resources, and transportation infrastructure. The laws that currently apply to these matters will apply to driverless vehicles, and driverless vehicle develop- ment will need to be mindful of sustainability values. Sustainability involves controlling impacts of transportation and land development on the envi- ronment––from traffic on local roads to global cli- mate change. Its objectives are to create less waste; to avoid consuming resource areas (such as wet- lands, forests, and agricultural lands); to use less energy; and to emit lower levels of greenhouse gases and other environmental pollutants.592 Reflecting the conviction that human living patterns can be shaped so that they do not overwhelm land and resources, sustainable development is committed to creating healthier and more resilient places at local, walkable levels for people to live, work, and play without the need for motor vehicles, which exacer- bate regional and global environmental problems.593 Whether driverless vehicles ultimately will contrib- ute to the long-term sustainability of environmental resources and transportation infrastructure will depend, in part, on how laws regarding these mat- ters react to driverless vehicles. A. Land Use Driverless vehicles could have profound impacts on land development and create lasting changes in land use patterns.594 Land use laws and transportation planning that seek to foster sustainable communities the Supremacy Clause of the United States Consti- tution, such federal driverless vehicle legislation could preempt varied state laws that will otherwise apply to driverless vehicles.585 For example, if a divergence of state laws regulating driverless vehi- cles in conflicting ways appears to stifle develop- ment of driverless vehicles, enactment of such a uni- form national law might be considered. However, no such legislation has been introduced in Congress. Within the Executive Branch, near term prospects for uniform national driverless vehicle regulation are extremely unlikely.586 Current preemption law, particularly with regard to ground transportation matters, is by no means predictable. Over the past 15 years, the United States Supreme Court has unevenly decided pre- emption issues in the context of vehicle regulation. Two United States Supreme Court decisions—one regarding air bags587 and another regarding seat- belts588—appear to suggest that, absent an express statutory provision that explicitly preempts state law, federal law might not sufficiently “occupy the field” of driverless car standards and requirements so as to eliminate all state law, particularly state tort law.589 The two Supreme Court cases wrestled with state laws regarding tort liability, an area of law that traditionally has been considered espe- cially appropriate for state law.590 Moreover, stan- dards for roadways owned by states are usually con- sidered particularly appropriate matters of state, rather than national concern.591 E. Regulatory Policy Potential regulation of driverless vehicles pres- ents two basic uncertainties. Driverless vehicle technologies remain under development with no decisions made even about such basic matters as whether connected vehicle technologies should be required equipment in driverless vehicle technologies. 585 See U.S. ConsT. art. VI, cl. 2. 586 See NHTSA PreliminAry sTATemenT, supra note 184, at 2 (NHTSA does not plan to adopt federal regulation of driverless vehicles in the near future). 587 Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861, 120 S. Ct. 1913, 146 L. Ed. 2d 914 (2000) (involving air bags and finding preemption of state tort law claims under the Federal National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and FVMSS 208, in a 5–4 decision). 588 Williamson v. Mazda Motor of Am., Inc., 562 U.S. 323, 131 S. Ct. 1131, 179 L. Ed. 2d 75 (2011) (involving seat belts and unanimously finding no federal preemption). 589 See also RAND rePorT, supra note 181, at 131 (“[R]ecent decisions…suggest that the Supreme Court will be cautious in finding state court tort claims preempted absent evidence of express legislative intent.”). 590 Geier, 529 U.S. at 861–68. 591 Id. 592 About Smart Growth, U.S. envT’l ProT. AgenCy (Mar. 20, 2015), http://www2.epa.gov/smartgrowth/about-smart- growth. 593 Id. 594 RAND rePorT, supra note 181, at 25. There are doz- ens of definitions of sustainable communities. See also AboUT Us, PArTnershiP for sUsTAinAble CommUniTies (Mar. 2, 2015), http://www.sustainablecommunities.gov/mission/about-us.

75 to the early years of automobiles. As early as the 1920s, vehicle miles traveled data were collected by the Department of Commerce as a measure of increased economic activity.600 The Federal Highway Administration began collecting VMT statistics from states in 1945.601 USDOT currently uses this vehicle miles traveled data, primarily from the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS),602 both for determining Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) fuel efficiency standards603 and for measuring road usage for federal highway funding purposes.604 In addition, EPA also relies on vehicle miles traveled as a basis for regulating mobile air pollution sources, particularly vehicle tailpipe emissions.605 According to the EPA’s 2001 report Our Built and Natural Environments, “[C]hanges in development patterns [i.e., sprawl] have had a particularly signifi- cant impact on VMT growth. Furthermore, because additional road capacity can be absorbed quickly by induced traffic, adding capacity alone is not likely to solve the problem of rapidly rising VMT.”606 In the 21st century, transportation and land planning seek to minimize vehicle miles traveled for environmental and fuel economy reasons. In addition, sprawl devel- opment is viewed as both aesthetically unappealing and wasteful of land resources. VMT measurements are already an integral part of federal transportation planning. They are the most likely basis for charging highway usage fees in road- use-charging proposals designed to increase or to sup- plement revenues for highway maintenance and will need to take account of driverless vehicles. At present, land and transportation regulators, as well as land use lawyers, are uncertain about whether driverless vehicles will contribute to communities that offer convenient places to live and work, as well as contribute to environmentally sustainable air, land, and water resource usage.595 In the United States, the Partnership for Sustain- able Communities—a joint project of the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Transportation, and the Environ- mental Protection Agency—promotes sustainable land use measures. The objective is “to coordinate federal housing, transportation, water, and other infrastructure investments to make neighborhoods more prosperous, allow people to live closer to jobs, save households time and money, and reduce pollu- tion.”596 Providing more transportation choices is among the key livability principles the Partnership promotes:597 “Develop[ing] safe, reliable, and eco- nomical transportation choices to decrease house- hold transportation costs, reduce our nation’s depen- dence on foreign oil, improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and promote public health.”598 Driverless vehicles are expected to con- tribute to all of these goals. 1. Vehicle Miles Traveled Land use regulatory efforts to decrease reliance on motor vehicles typically apply a concept called “vehicle miles traveled” (VMT) to measure changes in vehicle usage. For example, transportation engi- neers use VMT in calculating the level-of-service (LOS) of a roadway. VMT is also used in many other contexts as well. USDOT’s Bureau of Transporta- tion Statistics in the Federal Highway Administra- tion currently collects and publishes information about miles traveled in all states by all types of vehicles for the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS).599 Records of motor vehicle miles traveled date back 595 See, e.g., RAND rePorT, supra note 181, at xvi (“The overall effect of AV [driverless vehicle] technology on energy use and pollution is uncertain….”); JAne biersTedT, AAron gooze, Chris grAy, Josh PeTermAn, leon rAykin & Jerry WAlTers, effeCTs of nexT-generATion vehiCles on TrAvel demAnd And highWAy CAPACiTy 11–18 (2014). 596 About Us, PArTnershiP for sUsTAinAble CommUniTies, supra note 594. 597 Livability Principles, PArTnershiP for sUsTAin- Able CommUniTies (Oct. 31, 2013), http://www.sustainable communities.gov/mission/livability-principles. 598 Id. 599 See, e.g., Highway Statistics 2013, U.S. deP’T of TrAnsP., fed. highWAy Admin. (Nov. 7, 2014), http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ policyinformation/statistics.cfm. 600 See, e.g., bUreAU of The CensUs, U.s. deP’T of CommerCe, hisToriCAl sTATisTiCs of The UniTed sTATes 1789–1945, at 223 (1949) (listing miles traveled in the United States each year). 601 Highway Statistics Series, U.S. deP’T of TrAnsP., fed. highWAy Admin. (Nov. 7, 2014), http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ policyinformation/statistics.cfm. 602 miChAel grAnT eT Al., U.s. deP’T of TrAnsP., fed. highWAy Admin., hAndbook for esTimATing TrAnsPorTATion greenhoUse gAses for inTegrATion inTo The PlAnning Pro- Cess 65–66 (2013), http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/ climate_change/mitigation/publications_and_tools/ghg_ handbook/. 603 See, e.g., id. at 81–82 (discussing using vehicle miles traveled in conjunction with CAFE standards). 604 See FHWA Strategic Plan, U.S. deP’T of TrAnsP., fed. highWAy Admin. (Mar. 24, 2015), https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ policy/fhplan.cfm (describing measurement of “demand and use of transportation facilities” in vehicle miles traveled). 605 See Ellen Kinee & Allan Beidler, Revised Methodology for the Spatial Allocation of VMT and Mobile Source Emis- sions Data, http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/conference/ei10/ modeling/stella.pdf. 606 U.S. envT’l ProT. AgenCy, oUr bUilT And nATUrAl en- vironmenTs 25 (1st ed. 2001), http://www2.epa.gov/smart growth/our-built-and-natural-environments-technical- review-interactions-between-land-use.

76 a separate category could be used to incentivize or dis- incentivize driverless vehicle use. 2. Uncertain Impact of Driverless Vehicles on Vehicle Miles Traveled There has been considerable debate and research regarding whether driverless vehicles will be used to travel more or fewer vehicle miles. The 2014 RAND Report concluded equivocally that “[t]he potential effects of AVs [driverless vehicles] on aggregate vehicle miles traveled remain unclear, though it seems likely they will lead to more total travel rather than less.”613 Some land planners believe that the convenience of driverless vehicles for commuting between home and work may lead to more scattered residential develop- ment in rural areas, away from urban centers.614 In a driverless vehicle, the ability to use commuting time for other purposes, such as work, rest, or recreation, may make commute time and distance less onerous for driverless vehicle users. If so, driverless vehicle users may be encouraged to live in rural or semi-rural areas and to use a driverless vehicle to commute to work, school, or shopping. In short, many land plan- ners are concerned that the convenience benefits of driverless vehicles will result in longer commutes.615 On the other hand, to the extent that driverless vehicles are deployed as low-speed vehicles permitted only in urban areas, driverless vehicles could incentiv- ize more dense residential land development patterns. It may be that the availability of driverless vehicles, including on-demand ride-sharing versions,616 will be an amenity available only in urban areas.617 Such an enhanced personal mobility option may encourage residents to choose to live in more dense urban areas. Indeed, economical use of driverless vehicles for providing convenient and inexpensive618 on-demand construction.607 Declines in gasoline taxes, in part because of electric cars, as well as declines in vehicle usage associated with higher gasoline prices, point toward the need to replace the Highway Trust Fund’s reliance on gasoline taxes for revenue.608 In generating funds for roadway systems, fees based on the number of vehicle miles traveled on these roadways seem to be an attractive potential revenue alternative.609 Because charging for road use requires calculat- ing the vehicle miles traveled by a specific vehicle within a state, pilot studies have used onboard devices, often based on GPS, to capture distances the vehicle has been driven within the state.610 In driverless vehicles, the miles traveled by a vehicle within a geographical area could be routinely col- lected. If the driverless vehicle has V2I connected vehicle technologies, this miles-traveled information could be automatically transmitted to road-fee col- lectors who would be able to charge the driverless vehicle for particular use of specific roads. Vehicle miles traveled is also used as a way to mea- sure sustainability. California’s Sustainable Commu- nities Act611 provides an example of state sustainabil- ity regulation that seeks to foster sustainable communities through reductions in vehicle miles trav- eled.612 This Act requires regional land use planning and regulation to reduce use of passenger cars and light trucks through measurable decreases in vehicle miles traveled. This complex land use regulatory sys- tem provides an example of how VMT measurements can, for regulatory purposes, count the miles traveled only by particular types of vehicles. Adapting such a system to treat miles traveled by driverless vehicles as 607 See, e.g., Road Pricing Defined, U.S. deP’T of TrAnsP., fed. highWAy Admin., http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/revenue/ road_pricing/defined/vmt.aspx (last visited Sept. 20, 2015) (discussing charging VMT fees for roadway use). 608 See Kevin DeGood & Michael Madowitz, Switching from a Gas Tax to a Mileage-Based User Fee, CenT. for Am. Progress (Jul. 11, 2014), https://www.americanprogress.org/ issues/tax-reform/report/2014/07/11/93657/switching-from- a-gas-tax-to-a-mileage-based-user-fee/. 609 Road Pricing Defined, supra note 607. USDOT has studied such road use charging for many years and conduct- ed pilot programs in Oregon and Iowa. 610 Id. But see DeGood & Madowitz, supra note 608. 611 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, 2008 Cal. Stat. 5065. 612 CAl. gov’T Code § 14522.1(b)(1)–(2) (West Supp. 2014) (requiring the use of vehicle miles traveled by passenger cars and light trucks as a factor in determining guidelines for the development of regional transportation plans). Regarding the VMT concept used in the California Sus- tainable Communities regulations, VMT does not mean total vehicle miles traveled by all vehicles as may be used in calculation of roadway levels of service or in road-use charging systems. Rather it counts only miles traveled by passenger cars and light trucks. 613 RAND rePorT, supra note 181, at 17. 614 Id. at 18. 615 E.g., David Levinson, Climbing Mount Next: The Effects of Autonomous Vehicles on Society, 16 minn. J. sCi. & TeCh. 787, 807 (2015). 616 California regulates these ride-service companies as Transportation Network Companies (TNCs). A number of other states have followed California’s regulatory lead. 617 RAND rePorT, supra note 181, at 26. 618 A 2013 study by Columbia University’s Earth Insti- tute showed that roughly 9,000 autonomous cars would be able to replace all of the taxi cabs in New York City and provide wait time of just over half a minute and fares of about 50 cents per mile. Lawrence D. Burns, William C. Jordan & Bonnie A. Scarbourough, Transforming Personal Mobility 24 (2013), http://sustainablemobility.ei.columbia. edu/files/2012/12/Transforming-Personal-Mobility- Jan-27-20132.pdf. See also John Markoff, Google’s Next Phase in Driverless Cars, N.Y. Times (May 27, 2014), http:// www.nytimes.com/2014/05/28/technology/googles-next- phase-in-driverless-cars-no-brakes-or-steering-wheel.html.

77 results of this study indicate that driverless vehicles would likely lead to fewer cars being owned by the average household.624 At the same time, each vehicle would be driven more intensely (more miles over a given time period) so that roughly the same mileage would be covered by fewer cars.625 The research also suggests that such a driverless vehicle usage pattern would probably result in cars wearing out sooner, with more frequent purchases of new cars.626 If newer driv- erless vehicles have better, cleaner technology, a fre- quent replacement pattern could contribute to long- term sustainability and environmental benefits.627 B. Environment Driverless vehicles are expected to further sus- tainable community goals of reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon diox- ide.628 Although driverless vehicles could be powered by internal combustion engines, it is also possible that driverless vehicle technologies could, by regula- tion, only be available in zero-emission vehicles. It is unclear whether such a regulation would incentiv- ize purchase of driverless vehicles or, on the other hand, discourage their purchase. No matter what their fuel or energy source is, driverless vehicles are expected to contribute to environmental improvement by reducing air pollu- tion through avoiding traffic congestion and the accidents that generate traffic snarls.629 Intelligent routing will enable driverless vehicles to reduce fuel consumption and emissions.630 Moreover, by elimi- nating many car crashes, driverless vehicles are expected to reduce air pollution from traffic backups due to vehicle crashes that would otherwise be gen- erated by conventional vehicle crashes.631 In the long run, as driverless vehicles prove effective in avoid- ing crashes, it should be possible to reduce vehicle weight, which adds to fuel consumption and transportation (online ride-services or taxi applica- tions) requires fairly high population densities.619 Moreover, detailed dynamic roadway mapping may, at least initially, only be available in urbanized areas. Land or transportation planning regulations could also restrict driverless vehicles to urban areas. A state law or local ordinance could also permit the use of driverless vehicles only in designated parts of urban areas, or parts of a municipality. Driverless vehicles in the form of low speed vehi- cles will generally be useful only for relatively short- distance intra-urban journeys from residence to work, recreation, shopping, or public transit hubs providing transport for longer distance journeys.620 Low-speed driverless vehicles operating over shorter distances in urban areas would lead to fewer long- distance miles traveled by this type of driverless vehicle and perhaps greater use of public transpor- tation for journeys over longer distances. Restricting driverless vehicles to already dense urban areas, either by practical factors (such as the availability of dynamic digital mapping) or by legal regulation, could have the advantage of making dense urban communities more maneuverable, particularly for elderly and disabled persons for whom personal mobility is often difficult.621 Moreover, particularly in older cities, chronically congested areas could be zoned for driverless vehicles only.622 In areas characterized by narrow streets and difficult-to-navigate pavement, driverless vehicles might be the safest, as well as the most rational, form of ground transportation. Whether the total number of miles traveled by driv- erless vehicles is likely to increase or decrease overall VMT presents another issue. A study by the Univer- sity of Michigan Transportation Research Institute considered the “Potential Impact of Self-Driving Vehi- cles on Household Vehicle Demand and Usage.”623 The 619 RAND rePorT, supra note 181, at 27. 620 Id. at 18. 621 Id. at 16–17; Loro, supra note 245. A study at Carnegie Mellon University estimated the increase in vehicle usage when driverless cars enabled use by disabled and elderly persons. Chris Hendrickson, Allen Biehler & Yeganeh Mashayekn, ConneCTed And AUTonomoUs vehiCles 2040 vision finAl rePorT (2014) (hereinafter PennsylvAniA rePorT), http://www.ssti.us/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/ 11/Connected-Autonomous-Vehicles-2040-Vision-Final- Report-Task-10.pdf. 622 The London Congestion Charge Zone does something similar by charging vehicles for using roadways within the zone during times of high traffic congestion, with numerous exemptions such as for taxis on hire. See ThomAs f. berAldi, Jr., ACCePTAbiliTy, imPlemenTATion, And TrAnsferAbiliTy: An AnAlysis of The london CongesTion ChArge zone 3 (2007). 623 brAndon sChoeTTle & miChAel sivAk, Univ. of miCh. TrAnsP. reseArCh insT., PoTenTiAl imPACT of self-driving vehiCles on hoUsehold demAnd And UsAge (2015), http://www.driverlesstransportation.com/wp-content/ uploads/2015/02/UMTRI-2015-3.pdf. 624 Id. at 12. 625 Id. 626 Id. at 10. 627 Brad Plumer, Will Driverless Cars Solve Our Energy Problems—Or Just Create New Ones?, WAsh. PosT (Mar. 30, 2013), http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/ wp/2013/03/30/will-self-driving-cars-solve-all-our-energy- problems-or-create-new-ones/. 628 Id.; Jonathan Walker & Karen Crofton, Autonomous Vehicles & Smart Cities Can Cut Auto Fatalities & CO2 Emissions by 2025, CleAnTeChniCA (Nov. 14, 2014), http:// cleantechnica.com/2014/11/14/autonomous-vehicles-smart- cities-can-cut-auto-fatalities-co2-emissions-2025/. 629 Walker & Crofton, supra note 628. 630 RAND rePorT, supra note 181, at 18 (“[T]o the extent that AVs are able to promote smoother traffic patterns, they should lead to improved fuel economy and, in turn, lower fuel costs.”). 631 RAND rePorT, supra note 181, at 22–23; Walker & Crofton, supra note 628.

78 and with reduced vehicle headways.637 Adding sepa- rated or dedicated roadways for use only by driverless vehicles is likely to be resisted because such lanes would involve the cost both of adding infrastructure and of additional land for rights-of-way. Alternatively, it would be possible to designate existing roadway or highway lanes for driverless vehicle use only. Driverless vehicle lanes might be marked as “star” lanes, to distinguish them from existing diamond lanes that now accommodate car- pools, electric vehicles, and those paying tolls to use High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes. A “star” lane for driverless vehicles could be narrower and move faster. It would also have greater throughput than ordinary roadways or travel lanes on highways. The result would be more efficient use of rights-of-way and exist- ing infrastructure. A 2014 Report for the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation estimates that driver- less vehicles would increase lane capacity by roughly 40 percent during peak travel times.638 Providing such segregated driverless vehicle lanes might be a way to incentivize the purchase of driver- less vehicles, just as access to carpool lanes has incentivized purchases of electric vehicles. Despite its many benefits, such a proposal would, however, almost certainly generate significant political oppo- sition from other roadway users. Such a reaction greeted restricted use of carpool lanes and, particu- larly, the eligibility of electric vehicles for free use of carpool or High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes.639 Conventional traffic signs and signals will need to remain during the time both driverless and con- ventional vehicles are sharing roadways. Even at a time when all vehicles are driverless, traffic signs and traffic lights will probably be needed for use by bicyclists and pedestrians.640 Infrastructure improvement to enhance performance of driverless vehicles may, however, require retrofitting existing signage with special beacons to communicate direct data inputs to driverless vehicles.641 emissions.632 For example, robust passive safety equipment such as heavy bumpers or rollover pro- tection systems may no longer be necessary for occu- pant safety in driverless vehicles that do not crash or drive off roadways. C. Infrastructure Requirements Most transportation experts expect that driverless vehicles will initially have minimal impact on infra- structure requirements, since driverless vehicles will initially operate in mixed traffic on existing roadways shared with conventional, human-driven vehicles.633 As noted earlier in this report, it is uncertain whether driverless vehicles will add to or reduce overall vehicle roadway use. One report suggests that there will be a measure of additional roadway demand from elderly persons, persons with disabili- ties, and those ineligible to drive because of age.634 Such increases in travel demand appear likely to be offset by increases in both lane capacity and road- way capacity because driverless vehicles are capable of making more efficient use of existing roadways. Over the next decade or so, conventional vehicles, with which driverless vehicles will interact, are likely to change in a couple of important ways. First, many human-driven vehicles are likely to become increas- ingly automated and will utilize many of the same types of automated vehicle systems as driverless vehicles.635 Second, connected vehicle technologies may enable pervasive cooperative vehicle interaction among both driverless and conventional vehicles, at least in new passenger vehicles and light trucks. This change will come about if NHTSA carries out the agency’s announced plans to require DSRC connected vehicle V2V capabilities as safety equipment on all new passenger cars and light trucks.636 Eventually it may make sense to designate por- tions of roadways (dedicated lanes) or entirely segre- gated roads for use only by driverless vehicles, because driverless vehicles operate safely in narrower lanes 632 John Capp & Bakhtiar Litkouhi, The Crash-Proof Car, IEEE sPeCTrUm (Apr. 30, 2014. 2:05 PM), http://spectrum. ieee.org/transportation/safety/the-crashproof-car (“When cars no longer really crash, their frames—designed now to protect occupants during a collision—could be built lighter, making the vehicle more efficient.”). 633 gArrison & levinson, supra note 249, at 457. 634 PennsylvAniA rePorT, supra note 621, at 14. The report calculates potential increases in travel demand on road- ways in Pennsylvania and concludes that there are so many uncertainties that projecting increases in travel demand caused by new vehicle users is difficult to calculate. Id. at 15. 635 NHTSA PreliminAry sTATemenT, supra note 184, at 1. 636 NHTSA reAdiness rePorT, supra note 216, at 5, 71. This FMVSS will apply only to a segment of even driverless vehicles on the road, because the proposal does not include trucks, buses, and other heavy vehicles. 637 PennsylvAniA rePorT, supra note 621, at 12. The report provides a table considering 13 factors related to driverless vehicles that are likely to impact roadway capacity and flow. Id. 638 Id. at 13. 639 Martin Wachs & Brian D. Taylor, RAND Corp., Make HOT Lanes Permanent, RAND blog (Apr. 23, 2014), http:// www.rand.org/blog/2014/04/make-hot-lanes-permanent. html (“There are limited funds to build new freeways and the high cost and prolonged disruption from major road ex- pansions like the current [HOT lane] project on I-405 are front page news.”). 640 PennsylvAniA rePorT, supra note 621, at 16. 641 Id. at 30. The report notes that signal controllers and other ITS systems may need to be upgraded to communi- cate with driverless vehicles. According to the report, “Traffic signals are perhaps one of the most costly and challenging elements” of driverless vehicle deployment with regard to infrastructure. Id.

Next: X. CONCLUSION »
A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Legal Research Digest 69: A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles explores legal policy issues that may be associated with driverless vehicles. It provides an introduction to how civil and criminal liability may adhere to driverless vehicles, the implications of these vehicles for privacy and security, how these vehicles are likely to become subject to and potentially alter prevailing automobile insurance regimes, and other related topics.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!