Tag Archives: driverless cars

“Panel explores how humans, robot cars will interact”

Safety Advocacy, ,

Panel explores how humans, robot cars will interact
Melissa Nann Burke, Detroit News Washington Bureau 7:29 p.m. EST December 6, 2016

“At a Capitol Hill roundtable Tuesday, industry reps and lawmakers grappled with potential safety issues concerning how human drivers will interact with emerging autonomous technologies on roadways.

“The discussion, organized by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, drew a standing-room-only crowd on a rainy day in Washington. . .

“Chris Spear, president and CEO of the American Trucking Associations, said Congress could help by promoting cooperation and coordination among federal agencies with a role in overseeing various parts of the autonomous vehicle revolution — from NHTSA to the Federal Communications Commission, to the Environmental Protection Agency, to the Departments of Homeland Security and Agriculture.”

That sounds a lot like my suggestions for a national Vision Zero strategy, including a National Vision Zero Goal, a White House Vision Zero Task Force, Vision Zero Rulemaking, and a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman to oversee/coordinate/facilitate all of it!

TSO Petition 026

 

9/9/16 Motor Safety Act 50th Anniv. Miles to Go from Pres. Johnson vision of ‘cure for highway disease’

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , ,

Despite much progress in highway safety, the death toll still is rising from one year to the next. Why do we mindlessly accept it? Why don’t we rally together and conquer this dreadful enemy of innocent lives?

1a85et

September 9 marks the 50th anniversary of President Johnson’s signing of the Federal Highway Safety Act of 1966:

According to the July 15, 1966, Public Works committee report on the House version of the bill (H.R. 13290), each state must “have a highway safety program approved by the [Secretary of Commerce] . . . in accordance with uniform standards to be approved by the Secretary.” The legislation addressed a broad range of issues: driver education; licensing; pedestrian performance; vehicle registration and inspection; traffic control; highway design and maintenance; accident prevention, investigation, and record keeping; and emergency services. Congress authorized funds for distribution to the states, with a requirement that each state implement a highway safety program by December 31, 1968, or suffer a 10 percent reduction in apportioned funds. The legislation enjoyed strong, bipartisan support in the House. Chairman Fallon stated, “[This bill] continues the policy of meaningful cooperation between the States and the Federal Government on highway matters. I believe it is a firm step forward in the struggle to save lives, and I urge that we act with strong voice to put it into effect.” The measure passed the House by a vote of 318-3, and President Johnson signed the Highway Safety Act into law on September 9, 1966.

I only wish that we could get that same kind of support for the appointment of a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman and a nationwide network of  citizens active in community Traffic Safety Advocacy Groups in 2016!

Yet, according to a recent FairWarning article, Miles to Go on Highway Safety, we are far from acting as responsibly and conscientiously  as we would if we really cared about saving innocent lives from preventable vehicle violence — and that includes the oversight of “self-driving” vehicle technology development!

 

Univ. of Mich. Law set to be repository for legal & regulatory info. involving autonomous vehicles.

Safety Advocacy, ,

The University of Michigan is getting set to take on the challenge of becoming a central repository for legal and regulatory information relative to autonomous vehicles.

. . . while the focus has been on the gadgets and sleek designs, popular culture has taken little notice of a key component of a driverless future: the legal implications. Fair enough, since it would be difficult to create a compelling narrative about whether it is legal for the Minority Report cars to cross state lines, or the liability issues raised by a crash between KITT and a car driven by a person.

In the real world, though, those issues must be addressed before driverless cars can take the rapid leap forward that many are predicting. That’s why a group of Michigan Law faculty members and students are working on a grant-funded project to survey the legal and regulatory issues that arise from automated vehicle technologies. They are working with academic and industry leaders to survey issues such as liability, insurance, privacy, intellectual property rights, and antitrust implications. . .

“It’s hard to know how this is going to affect insurers and how the risk will be allocated. This is something very important to the industry. If we move in the direction of greater manufacturer responsibility for highway accidents, it will mean a shift of auto risks from auto insurers to product-liability insurers,” Logue says, and figuring it out could slow the speed at which autonomous vehicles hit the roadways. Automakers, meanwhile, are “nervous that it will inhibit innovation,” he says. . .

Some developers of driverless cars could take on the liability themselves — including Volvo, which has said it will do when cars are in fully autonomous mode. The carmaker also has promised death-proof cars by 2020. In the driver’s seat

The topic of liability was discussed. The article suggested that compensation to victims might come in this way:

One option would be the establishment of a fund, along the lines of the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund—which requires compensation to be provided for any individual (or a personal representative of a deceased individual) who suffered physical harm or was killed as a result of the terrorist-related aircraft crashes of Sept. 11, 2001, or the debris removal that took place immediately after the crashes. With standardized technology and driverless cars, Crane suggests, manufacturers could pay into a fund that would compensate people who are injured in accidents. In return, they could be immune to tort liability.

So, if that is the way it went, what pressure would there be on any individual manufacturer to fix defects, etc.? Based on our experience and observations of the lack of accountability, in past decades, by trailer manufacturers to do anything substantial to prevent underride deaths, I am very skeptical about this.

Roundtable Display Table Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 186

“Growing Momentum for Self-Driving Cars Worries Safety Advocates” Fair Warning

Safety Advocacy, ,

Growing Momentum for Self-Driving Cars Worries Safety Advocates – See more at: http://www.fairwarning.org/2016/06/self-driving-cars/#sthash.V6EZIQZe.eVIkkjWL.dpuf

Nurenberg, Paris, Heller & McCarthy ALMFTS facebook banner

Other related articles:

States Vie to Drive Autonomous Vehicles

NHTSA’s, Google’s War on Drivers

“NHTSA: Driverless, Directionless in DC”; A National Vision Zero Goal can move us in the right direction.

AnnaLeah and Mary, Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , ,

Tonight I just happened to find a great article written by Roger Lanctot on the topic of driverless vehicles and crash avoidance and other good things like that. He said it with much more technical expertise than I ever could. Read it here: NHTSA: Driverless, Directionless in DC

Voices clash at first public hearing on self-driving cars

Thank you, Roger, for clarifying the issues and throwing out a challenge. Let’s hope that we as a nation can take up that challenge in a wise and timely fashion.

Here we have the opportunity to pull together the creative intelligence and technological resources of our country. Will we be able to look back, in years to come, with gratitude for being able to plan ahead in a non-competitive way to develop a workforce which creates useful products–all the while protecting health and life?

Here’s my idea–in keeping with Roger’s suggestion of a Vision Zero objective related to this technological challenge. Let’s say that a Vision Zero objective would mean that the guiding light/the plumbline would be a continual focus on safety–always asking the question at each step along the way, “How will this impact safety?”

And how would this be accomplished? By President Obama setting a National Vision Zero Goal–because who else would do it? It is an issue much broader than the Department of Transportation–and should include Labor, Commerce, Public Health, among others.

And then President Obama needs to establish a White House Vision Zero Task Force with Committees made up of resourceful people to take up challenges such as Roger Lanctot has suggested: “the development and adoption of technology that could start reducing the alarmingly high rate of crash-related injuries and fatalities in the U.S. and abroad – while also stimulating the economy and ultimately reducing the cost of vehicle ownership – or possibly eliminating vehicle ownership.”

Finally, President Obama needs to sign a Vision Zero Executive Order which will pave the way for rulemaking to actually make safety The Priority and other priorities would then fall in place subsequent to saving lives.

Can you imagine how effective and efficient such a process could be? Working together toward a common goal for the common good. Making good use of our resources and skills to meet needs.

Towards Zero Crash Deaths & Serious Injuries. A vision worth pursuing, a guiding light to keep us on track. Let’s do it, people.

What will it take to make a significant reduction in the number of people who die on our roads?

Andy Young, Marianne Karth, Jerry Karth, John Lannen
Andy Young, Marianne Karth, Jerry Karth, John Lannen in front of the DOT, March 5, 2016, delivering the 20,000 Vision Zero Petition Signatures

Save Lives Not Dollars: Urge DOT to Adopt a Vision Zero Policy

Adopt a Vision Zero goal and sign an Executive Order to Save Lives Not Dollars

How we will get around in the future was never fully imagined in the past. . .

Safety Advocacy,

I was thinking again about how there might be less distracted driving crash deaths if we all drove stick shift cars. So I did some searching on the topic and ran across this lengthy article on driverless cars and the future of transportation:

Will autonomous cars change the role and value of public transportation?

This comment in the article caught my attention and brought up a very valid concern:

“The rise of tech companies effectively making their own rules and then asking the public to accept them puts in question the government’s ability to maintain stability in the industry while ensuring safety and continued access.”