Tuesday 30 April 2024

Three Future Histories, Another Action Scene And Self-Driving Cars

Later in the evening, I turn to non-Andersonian reading or rereading but find it difficult to keep focused on Frank Herbert's Children of Dune. Herbert either is unaware of or just ignores the need to control narrative points of view. His characters connive for power and influence in an interstellar empire without conveying any sense of life in that empire. By contrast, we do receive some impression of how people live on Hermes, Dennitza, Imhotep, Daedalus and, to a lesser extent, Terra in Poul Anderson's Technic History. The Technic History gives us everything that Foundation and Dune should have given us but it has not yet been filmed.

Meanwhile, rereading Anderson's The Byworlder, there is a second action scene. This time, Yvonne is kidnapped and Skip goes to extraordinary lengths to assist the FBI's rescue job. As I said before, what we have had so far is mostly not human-Sigman interactions but human interactions caused by the Sigman's presence.

The cars in this fictional future are not aircars as we have come to expect but are self-driving. In Yvonne's car:

"...the pilot opened fuel cells to maximum..." (II, p.15)

"...pilot..." makes us think of aircraft but here it means the gadget driving the car.

"Pilot set, the car hummed into motion." (X, p. 99)

"An auto purred by. Skip shouted and waved. The man inside was watching television and didn't notice." (XI, p. 102)

Watching television? Sure. The car is a self-mover, a true auto-mobile.

15 comments:

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

I like that! With self driving cars we could do other things: watch TV, read a book, or take a nap.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

But would we feel safe? I prefer train.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

Why not? If we assume a reliable Traffic Control system such cars should be safe.

Ad astra! Sean

S.M. Stirling said...

There are already self-driving taxicabs in a number of American cities (San Francisco, Austin, some others) and Tesla is launching an autonomous taxi service this year.

It's only a matter of time until it's generalized.

I drive a Tesla, and they have a free demonstration of their autonomous system now. It's not really "Full Self Driving" but it does some things rather well.

Eg., it parks better than I do. You just tap the display and it parks the car, and very neatly and quickly.

Jim Baerg said...

Thank You.
I had been wondering if there was any reason to get 'self drive' before it is good enough for me to lie back & sleep while the car gets me to my destination.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Mr. Stirling!

The big problem, of course, aside from the cost of buying a Tesla, is that the infrastructure needed for mass use of EVs, does not exist. Where or how are many millions of Americans going to recharge their hypothetical EVs? And where are you going to get the energy for that?

(Roll of drums) You guessed it! From oil, coal, and natural gas power plants!

And what are you going to do with all those millions of worn out lithium batteries?

Most Americans resist buying EVs because of such problems.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,

Is the practical implication a big investment in fossil fuels?

Paul.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

Either that or we get serious about nuclear power.

Another problem: in cold weather EVs lose energy more quickly, necessitating more frequent and even longer amounts of time wasted at recharging stations.

EVs are best left, for now, as something to be beta tested by the wealthy.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,

If that is the choice, then it has to be nuclear power for climate change reasons.

Paul.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

Nuclear power is the only realistic alternative to fossil fuels.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

And solar longer term.

S.M. Stirling said...

Sean: I charge at home, mostly. Just plug it in once a week. It costs less than 12% of what buying gas does.

Incidentally, large thermal power stations are immensely more efficient at converting combustion to electricity than ICE cars are at converting gasoline to mechanical movement.

As in, over 2.5x as efficient. So even if the central power stations burned the same fuel, they would burn much -less- for the same amount of distance covered.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Mr. Stirling!

But millions and millions of car drivers have only curbside parking. And we don't have the infrastructure, both in power plants and charging stations, to handle mass use of EVs.

Ad astra! Sean

Jim Baerg said...

The energy density of batteries is still tiny compared to gasoline. Also SFAIK batteries still perform poorly in *cold* weather. So for now I think I would go for a plug in hybrid with a battery that will take the car 50 to 100 km before the combustion engine start turning a generator to keep the battery slightly charged & the car moving. That will mean most in-city driving is done on the battery, but there isn't a problem going long distances outside the city.
I live in Calgary in an apartment & the parking spots all have 120 V outlets for block heaters that will work fine for charging a plug-in hybrid overnight. The combustion engine is also just what is needed to keep the passengers from freezing when the outside temperature is well below zero.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Jim!

Exactly, "pure" EVs still have too many disadvantages to be suitable for mass use. Including how badly they perform in cold weather. I can see "hybrids" working for some, but not for most. Primarily because many millions of car owners with only curbside parking still won't be able to quickly recharge those batteries or have outlets for those block heaters.

We are reaping the all too predictable consequences of gov't policies foolishly pushing EVs with no thought given to the problems discussed here. I believe EVs are being pushed at least 15 years too soon.

Ad astra! Sean