XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science
From: bap@shrdlu.com
On 15/01/14 03:35, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article , robban@clubtelco.com
> says...
>>
>> On 14/01/2014 10:57 pm, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article , leszek.karlik@gmail.com
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 13:20:24 +0100, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>> However, that would not save you much if anything because you'd still
>>>>> have to maintain all those vehicles.
>>>>
>>>> Luckily, electric vehicles are significantly less maintenance-intensive
>>>> than
>>>> internal combustion vehicles.
>>>
>>> But now you have the issue of the electric vehicles not having any range
>>> and being slow to recharge, so the strategy of sending them hither and
>>> beyond picking up and dropping passengers fails.
>>
>> As far as I know, all current electric cars will do about 100km before
>> they need to be recharged. Not many people commute that far by car every
>> day.
>
> We are not talking about one person having a car that he uses to commute
> to work and back. We are talking about him having a self-driving car
> that drives him to work, drive itself back home, takes his wife shopping
> and to the beauty parlor, takes her home, drives back to his office to
> pick him up and take him home after work, and somewhere along the way
> takes the kids to soccer. It's doing a lot of driving around that the
> single-user commuter car isn't. And when you expect it to also make you
> money by carrying passengers for hire . . .
That's what you are talking about, the rest of us aren't. The car
doesn't have to drive home after delivering you to work it can pick up
one of your cow-orkers who needs to visit another site or go to the
airport. Meanwhile your wife gets a different vehicle to take her to the
beauty parlor. The kids don't need a person to pick them up from school,
they have a car available to do that.
--
Bernard Peek
bap@shrdlu.com
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
