By approving operators Waymo and Cruise to compete with ride-share services and cabs, Californian officials took a significant step ahead Thursday in the expansion of driverless taxi services in San Francisco.
Before voting three to one to allow Waymo, a division of Google parent Alphabet, and General Motors-owned Cruise to essentially run 24-hour robotaxi services in San Francisco, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) heard six hours of public comments.
According to CPUC commissioner John Reynolds, who voted in support of certification, “today is the first of many steps in bringing AV (autonomous vehicle) transportation services to Californians and setting a successful and transparent model for other states to follow.”
Without human drivers at the wheel, Waymo cars were authorized to operate at speeds of up to 105 km/h (65 mph) in some adverse weather.
Additionally, it obtained approval to provide paid trips in autonomous cars in its home city of Mountain View, California.
Cruise was given permission to operate a fare-paying passenger service in San Francisco at a maximum speed of 35 mph, without passing through a lot of smoke or dense fog.
Prior to now, only specific times of the day could Cruise charge passengers. Waymo has been prohibited from charging for trips with no human driver present.
In San Francisco, driverless automobiles were first introduced in 2014 with a required human “safety driver” present.
California removed the necessity for a human driver to be in the automobile four years later.
A wide range of viewpoints were represented in the comments left on the CPUC session. Some criticized robotaxis as dangerous dangers, while others praised them as remedies for everything from climate change to traffic rage.
Bus lanes have been stopped, driverless cars have become trapped in the middle of the road, and they have even impeded the work of police and firefighters.
Others present at the hearing, however, commended the cars for offering disabled persons independence, enhancing traffic safety, and assisting in the abolition of discrimination.
Others rejected all vehicles, arguing that the future belongs to public transportation, which is hygienic, practical, and reasonably priced.
No of the type, cars are not the future of cities, argued one speaker.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.