The future of cars

If you live in London, it’s easy to see the limitations of cars. I currently own two vehicles, a car and a motorcycle. The car sits unused for days or weeks on end, as it’s seldom the most convenient, let alone the cheapest option.

Between the sitting in traffic, paying (or studiously avoiding) the congestion charge, and forking out more in parking than it would cost me to do the same trip by train, the comfort of a door-to-door trip in the warm, with companions and a radio station of my own choosing, is a luxury, expensive in both time and money.

If I want cheap door to door travel at my own convenience, the motorbike is palpably better. If I want to read en route or have a beer while I’m out, it’s the bus or the train.

But nipping around London as a single person with no kids is one thing. Travelling between cities, or moving a family between home/school/work/nursery/supermarket/grandparents, or just living in a place without 24 hour public transport, present a whole different set of problems. Problems which are often best solved with a motorised, privately-owned, self-driven box on wheels. Which is why most of the journeys undertaken (63%) and most of the miles covered (79%) in the UK last year were done by car.

So, can we continue to fulfil our desire to move around in a personal box on wheels? The number of cars on Britain’s roads is likely to keep rising, though this is probably more a function of increasing wealth than simple numbers of people. In 1951 fewer than 15% of UK households had a car or van. By 1971 nearly half had one, and in 2009 75% of households owned at least one car (32% had two or more).

Of course, the recession has slowed this move towards car ownership. It’s also possible that as more and more people live in cities, many of us will decide that we don’t need to own a car, for the same reasons I’ve outlined above. And though we are travelling around the UK more than we were in 1972, say, (around 7,000 miles a year, up from 4,500) that total distance hasn’t risen much since 1990.

There are two main schools of thought about the future of cars.

One is that technology will solve the problems. Hydrogen is slipping from favour, as the technical and infrastructure drawbacks become more glaring, so electric cars are the current favourite to transform the gas-guzzler into a clean, quiet, low-carbon runaround. Intelligent transport systems are also in vogue, meaning anything from co-ordinated traffic light and speed limit systems to near-autonomous robot vehicles that control their own speed and distance from the car in front, maximising efficiency and minimising the dangers of driver error.

The other approach is to say that cars are more of a problem than a transport solution, no matter what they burn or how tamely they trundle about. Trains, bicycles and working-from-home are the favoured alternatives here. Technology does play a role, but it’s mainly as a tool to help us change our behaviour – by charging drivers per mile, and extra at rush hour for example. Demand management is the name of this game.

But both these approaches lack vision.

It’s not that our behaviour should never change. After all, our transport habits have changed enormously since our grandparents’ day, when car ownership was a luxury for the few, and travel abroad remained a dream for many unless they were going to fight a war. But do we really want to roll back the democratisation of mobility, instead of making it ever more available, ever faster, cheaper, more convenient and comfortable?

And it’s not that technology has nothing to offer. Clearly, the successive introductions of the bicycle, the railway, affordable cars and accessible air travel have all made possible this newly connected world. There’s no reason to think we’ve exhausted the potential of technological innovation.

But let’s use the possibilities of this technology with some imagination. For example, do vehicles need to stick with one power train for local, inter-urban and international travel? Couldn’t we “containerise” our personal vehicles, so the same box with the same baby strapped in the back can trundle round the corner on electric power, lock onto a motorway to cross the country without continuous driver input (more reading time) and then drive through the Welsh hills to Grandma’s house on an efficient petrol/hydrogen/whatever engine? Would we be less attached to owning a car if we could have reliable and convenient access to a range of vehicles at a moment’s notice, on the car club or bicycle rack model? Whatever did happen to flying cars – are we really just waiting for somebody to solve the Air Traffic Control issue?

Most of us want to travel, that’s clear. Most of us want the autonomy of a self-drive vehicle, at least some of the time. Let’s start looking at both new technology and new models of transport from the point of view of what people actually want, and see just how far we can go.

Throughout October and November, The Independent Online is partnering with the Battle of Ideas festival to present a series of guest blogs from festival speakers on the key questions of our time.

Timandra Harkness is a journalist and writer, film, science and comedy; She is the co-writer and performer, Edinburgh Festival Fringe smash hit Your Days Are Numbered: the maths of death. She produced the debate Plug in, turn on, drive off: the future of cars? at the Battle of Ideas festival on Saturday 30 October.

Picture:Reuters

Recent Posts on Battle of Ideas

• An open letter to Melanie Phillips
• Privacy challenges ahead 2013
• Anders Breivik: Narcissist. Murderer. Insane?
• Free speech is the real loser in Terry v Ferdinand
• 'Abortion industry': A slur on the women who support their choice

• http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=648922796 Richard Lawrence

  A mile to the station from my house.
  Trains take an hour and a half to get to work, and back. Two changes.

  Or I can take the car and all my paperwork in luxurious ease. Journey only takes 40 minutes door to door. It costs less, has my Patrick O’Brian CDs, is dry, and I won’t end up sweaty, smelly, and possibly soaking wet riding to the station. Also the traffic may be a problem but it won’t cause anything like as many delays as the trains did when I used to take them.

  Sorry mate but public transport just doesn’t work when you are travelling any distance to work or university. Plus I enjoy driving, I love my 13 year old Ford Escort like a brother, and the highlight of my day is the driving I do, 17 miles to work and 17 miles back.

• Guest

  Well, I’m glad you’re comfy.

  But on a global level, weighing up drivers’ cosseted convenience against the costs in resources, to the environment, to public safety, to the atomisation of society…I’d have to say yours is a pretty selfish viewpoint.

• http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/IZR4K55M5PNLQGNMJRNTHVUXUU Mike Cawood

  I wouldn’t recommend anyone to risk their life on a motorcycle. When I’m in London, public transport wins with reasonable fares – provided you use an Oyster Card. I actually enjoy using public transport in London.

• Coventarian

  Richard Lawrence wrote:
  “I won’t end up sweaty, smelly, and possibly soaking wet riding to the station”
  A mile away?

  If you get sweaty cycling a mile, you really need some exercise. How about cycling the 17 miles to work most days of the week?

• http://www.facebook.com/Jethro.Gauld Jethro Gauld

  I heartily agree with Koeboy. We need to relocalise the economy, it would make transport sense for companies to preferentially hire new staff who lived within walking/cycling distance or who are willing to move there. For now might I suggest car share?Also considering how many journeys are under three miles, these could easily be reduced.I know of people in the construction industry who travel across counties to work when people who live near that construction site are sent to a construction site nearer to the first set of people in this paragraph.

• VelocetteKTT

  “” But let’s use the possibilities of this technology with some imagination. “” ………
  Author has the same level of mental development as our neighbor’s 3 yr old daughter , together with the same degree of knowledge of physics, engineering and economics as their 10yr old .
  The 10yr old is a Lab.

• highlandjock

  Trite article. I live in a part of the country where there is no public transport, so cars are essential. We live at 1,300 feet above sea level so need a 4 x 4 which is being taxed out of existence, simply because of London sensibilities. Electric cars will overtax the already inadequate grid, even if nuclear power is developed to a greater degree. The only practical vehicles will be hydrogen-powered as the by-product is water. …….but you dismiss these!!!!!! Get a grip, and research the subject properly, for God’s sake!!!!!!!

• highlandjock

  If you lived in the Peak District at 1,300 feet above sea-level, you wouldn’t say any of this. I bet you live in a city. Well, when the famine arrives, tough titty, chum!!