Brought home a Volt.

[Raza]

I think even plain gas engines have a long way to go.  When you get cars driving autonomously and communicating with each other, intersections will just become precise criss crossing of cars all over the place.  Cars will be able to "train" together to reduce drag significantly.

These are the big changes coming.  Everything starts falling in line.  When cars can park themselves, is size and shape of a car as big of a concern?  More aerodynamic shapes.  If everything is autonomous, do you need all the crash worthiness if cars aren't crashing?  You're going to get super light, living rooms on wheels, shaped like tear drops.

All of a sudden, 50 mpg city, 80-90 mpg highway will be realistic, easily.  I wouldn't be surprised if 100 mpg is cracked pretty easily.  As weight decreases more and more, energy density of your fuel and power density become incredibly important.  Do you really need these heavy, nature harming, complex batteries and powertrains anymore?

Now you're on the autonomous car bandwagon.  I imagine the millions of deaths will certainly reduce our carbon footprint. 

[Laconian]

As much as you dislike the idea of autonomous car, the truth hurts: people are pretty shitty drivers, and they're only getting crappier & more distracted.

[Raza]

As much as you dislike the idea of autonomous car, the truth hurts: people are pretty shitty drivers, and they're only getting crappier & more distracted.

You can't solve problems caused by tech with tech. 

[Laconian]

Why not?

The problem is that we are requiring that everybody drive a car, and we have set the bar very low in order to exclude as few people as possible. Tech distractions exacerbate the issue, but we still have a lot of really incompetent people operating heavy machinery daily.

[Raza]

Why not?

The problem is that we are requiring that everybody drive a car, and we have set the bar very low in order to exclude as few people as possible. Tech distractions exacerbate the issue, but we still have a lot of really incompetent people operating heavy machinery daily.

The day a car is as reliable as a computer is the day that I give up on road travel.  Seriously, I know you nerds and whatever think computers are great and all, but it takes one virus and instead of taking your computer to Best Buy you're just fucking dead.

[Laconian]

The day a car is as reliable as a computer is the day that I give up on road travel.  Seriously, I know you nerds and whatever think computers are great and all, but it takes one virus and instead of taking your computer to Best Buy you're just fucking dead.

If you have a car with push button start and DBW throttle, you're already putting your life in the hands of some outsourced codemonkey.

[CALL_911]

The day a car is as reliable as a computer is the day that I give up on road travel.  Seriously, I know you nerds and whatever think computers are great and all, but it takes one virus and instead of taking your computer to Best Buy you're just fucking dead.

What Laconian says is true. I'm no fan of all this automated driving and whatnot, but your car is already kind of as reliable as its computers.

[hotrodalex]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shockley%E2%80%93Queisser_limit

Energy density of sunlight is pretty piss poor to begin with.  Combine that with poor efficiency, and you're simply not going to generate much power.

  The middle men is hundreds of years of taking that energy and making it more dense and usable.

Solar energy is there whether we capture it or not. So why not capture it? Sure, it may not be as efficient as other means, but it doesn't have to be. It's not like drilling for oil where it's a huge waste if you can only capture 15% of the energy. Putting solar panels on the roof of every house and building means we can rely less on oil, so why not try to develop the technology further?

I seem to be much more open minded when it comes to future energy sources than some of you guys. I'm 100% for developing fuel cells, electric cars, and continuing to make gas engines more efficient. Might as well try every method and push it to the limits.

[Laconian]

I agree that it makes sense to use it when/where it makes sense, but by itself it isn't sufficient - we use a lot more energy than that.

[Laconian]

What Laconian says is true. I'm no fan of all this automated driving and whatnot, but your car is already kind of as reliable as its computers.

That's not to say that I like the trend, I do enjoy driving my car.

[hotrodalex]

I agree that it makes sense to use it when/where it makes sense, but by itself it isn't sufficient - we use a lot more energy than that.

Well yeah. I think the best energy grid is one that can take advantage of each technology and optimize it. Arizona, for example, could have billions of solar panels. But Seattle would probably want to go with a different type of energy production.

Nuclear fusion is still the best option (in the future). I know there are a few new ideas with how to get it to work, but the public opinion of nuclear power isn't the best and the funding sucks.

[GoCougs]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

Ringworld!

[GoCougs]

You can't solve problems caused by tech with tech. 

The danger of autonomous cars isn't the tech but what is needed to enable them - a whole lotta government. The worst idea in the history of the world IMO.

[GoCougs]

Solar energy is there whether we capture it or not. So why not capture it? Sure, it may not be as efficient as other means, but it doesn't have to be. It's not like drilling for oil where it's a huge waste if you can only capture 15% of the energy. Putting solar panels on the roof of every house and building means we can rely less on oil, so why not try to develop the technology further?

I seem to be much more open minded when it comes to future energy sources than some of you guys. I'm 100% for developing fuel cells, electric cars, and continuing to make gas engines more efficient. Might as well try every method and push it to the limits.

Well, you'll see the light when it comes to paying for these things .

It's not about closed mindedness it's about simply engineering, physics and economics.

[Rupert]

Well yeah. I think the best energy grid is one that can take advantage of each technology and optimize it. Arizona, for example, could have billions of solar panels. But Seattle would probably want to go with a different type of energy production.

Nuclear fusion is still the best option (in the future). I know there are a few new ideas with how to get it to work, but the public opinion of nuclear power isn't the best and the funding sucks.

Looks like someone is taking a college class on the topic...

[Rupert]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shockley%E2%80%93Queisser_limit

Energy density of sunlight is pretty piss poor to begin with.  Combine that with poor efficiency, and you're simply not going to generate much power.

  The middle men is hundreds of years of taking that energy and making it more dense and usable.

Hundreds of years? Are you one of those 5000 year old Earth idiots?

[Onslaught]

Autonomous car won't speed or do all the fun things. They also won't need body work so I'm 100% against them.

[NomisR]

Why not?

The problem is that we are requiring that everybody drive a car, and we have set the bar very low in order to exclude as few people as possible. Tech distractions exacerbate the issue, but we still have a lot of really incompetent people operating heavy machinery daily.

The problem I see with the autonomous cars is the same problem there is with cell phones.  I would really hate to be stuck with a 10 year old car with buggy software and the carrier refuses to update it to the newest version of the software because the car is old and they want me to replace it. 

[hotrodalex]

Looks like someone is taking a college class on the topic...

Nope.

[veeman]

completely autonomous cars are very very far away in the future.  there are too many variables regarding time of day and resulting light conditions, weather, road conditions, non-vehicular road traffic, unexpected road debris, etc.  Robots can do simple or very complicated tasks (like in an automotive assembly line) where there are no constantly changing unpredictable variables.  prior to cars being fully automated, there would be fully automated trains (a far far easier task, but not close to being realized) and fully automated planes (autopilot is not close to being instituted for taking off or landing).
   

[MrH]

Well, you'll see the light when it comes to paying for these things .

It's not about closed mindedness it's about simply engineering, physics and economics.

Exactly.

[ChrisV]

completely autonomous cars are very very far away in the future.  there are too many variables regarding time of day and resulting light conditions, weather, road conditions, non-vehicular road traffic, unexpected road debris, etc.

And yet the Google autonomous cars to do the mapping are working very well so far.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/31/why-googles-autonomous-car-tech-could-be-worth-more-than-its-we/

[Vinsanity]

Autonomous car won't speed or do all the fun things. They also won't need body work so I'm 100% against them.

I'm actually hoping that we'll have them before I turn into one of those hopeless old farts who mows down dozens of bystanders driving through a farmer's market

[NomisR]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

At first, I was thinking, what does a vacuum have to do with nuclear fission

[Raza]

If you have a car with push button start and DBW throttle, you're already putting your life in the hands of some outsourced codemonkey.

I don't have push button start.  Don't know about drive by wire though. 

I can't believe that the solution to bad drivers isn't to make drivers better, but to enable them to be worse. 

[Raza]

What Laconian says is true. I'm no fan of all this automated driving and whatnot, but your car is already kind of as reliable as its computers.

As its computers is a different concept than what I stated. 

[NomisR]

I don't have push button start.  Don't know about drive by wire though. 

I can't believe that the solution to bad drivers isn't to make drivers better, but to enable them to be worse. 

If you take the drivers out of the equation of driving, theoretically, it makes everyone safer.  But of course, if they build something idiot proof, mankind will still find a way to build a better idiot. 

[Onslaught]

I'm actually hoping that we'll have them before I turn into one of those hopeless old farts who mows down dozens of bystanders driving through a farmer's market

I'd hope you'd have the brains to not drive anymore. And if you'd not have the brains to know that you can no longer drive a normal car then you'll probably not have enough in the think tank to program your robot car to get you to the mall for your power walking.

[AutobahnSHO]

Solar still has a lot more potential.

Chemical Engineering friend was just laid off from plant which was making that dark stuff they make solar panels out of.

Solar is indeed the most powerful energy source on our planet- but the only efficient collector is plants.

[Vinsanity]

I'd hope you'd have the brains to not drive anymore. And if you'd not have the brains to know that you can no longer drive a normal car then you'll probably not have enough in the think tank to program your robot car to get you to the mall for your power walking.

Well, with cars going all voice-commandy nowadays, I can probably just be like, "Siri, drive me to the moon!" or whatever it is senile old people will say in the year 2063.