At first glance, the rise of autonomous vehicles seems like a welcome addition to public transport.
Tech giants like Waymo, a subsidiary of Alphabet Inc., are promoting their self-driving taxis as the ideal solution to urban mobility problems. The vehicles are already in operation in cities like San Francisco, Phoenix and Los Angeles, and Waymo recently announced a new promotion: travelers in the San Francisco Bay Area can save $2,80 on rides to select public transit stops. With this campaign, Waymo says it wants to “make clean mobility more accessible.” But behind this noble message, there seems to be a very different story.
On the surface, it sounds appealing: autonomous vehicles augmenting public transportation and supporting riders in transit-heavy communities. Waymo argues that its service, combined with biking and walking, can contribute to more sustainable urban mobility. To help realize this vision, the company has even appointed a new director of transportation policy.
LOBBY
In addition, the advocacy group Chamber of Progress lobbied California regulators to approve autonomous vehicles, arguing that the technology could provide mobility for the elderly, disabled and residents of hard-to-reach areas. This approach seems to address the financial shortfalls faced by public transportation companies. However, critical questions are being raised about the impact of robotaxis on public transportation and the real motivations of companies like Waymo.
A closer look at Waymo’s promotion raises important questions. For example, how does Waymo know if a customer traveling to a station is actually transferring to public transportation, rather than simply collecting the discount and continuing on public transportation? According to Adam Lenz, Waymo’s head of sustainability, the company is currently unable to make the connection between a robotaxi ride and actual public transportation use. Such technology would be complicated and potentially sensitive due to privacy laws. Still, it hopes Waymo that such integrations will become possible in the future.
Another challenge is the practical execution of the promotion. Where will passengers be picked up and dropped off? Some of the stations mentioned, such as Muni Metro’s West Portal station, do not have designated spaces for taxis or ride-hailing services like Waymo. This could lead to cars double-parking, which not only slows down traffic but can also be dangerous for passengers who need to cross the street quickly.
no commotion
Despite these potential problems, the promotion is unlikely to cause much of a stir in public transit. The reason? Even with a $2,80 discount, few riders are likely to bother combining their trip with a robotaxi. This lack of enthusiasm for combined public transit and taxi rides doesn’t come out of nowhere. When smartphone-driven ride-hailing services like Uber and Lyft became popular in U.S. cities in 2016, there was much excitement about their potential to solve the so-called “first mile/last mile” problem. To test this theory, the Federal Transit Administration funded five projects that measured how many people were willing to use these services in conjunction with public transit.
The results were disappointing. In St. Petersburg, Florida, where Uber riders were offered a discount of about $4,70 for a ride to a public transit stop, an average of only 40 people took advantage of the offer each day. In San Francisco, a 2022 study found that only 0,4% of trips in the region combined public transit and ride-hailing services. The reasons are clear. People don’t like transfers, and those who already pay for a taxi are likely to stay in their car for the entire trip to avoid hassle. In addition, the cost of an Uber or Lyft is often prohibitive for the average public transit rider, who tends to be on a lower income.
People don't like transferring, and those who already pay for a taxi will likely stay in the car for the entire ride to avoid hassle.
Self-driving taxis are expected to face the same issues, as they offer the same ease (or inconvenience) of use as Uber en Lyft, only without the human driver. The concept of summoning a car to a station — whether it’s a robotaxi or a regular taxi — simply isn’t practical for most travelers. In fact, an increase in self-driving cars could actually hurt public transportation.
research
Research into Uber and Lyft shows that these ride-hailing services not only lure riders away from public transit, they also contribute to increased congestion due to so-called “deadheading miles” — miles traveled without passengers in the car. In cities like San Francisco, local governments have found that these ride-hailing services were responsible for much of the increase in traffic between 2010 and 2016. This has a negative impact on buses, which are taking longer to get to because of the increased traffic. Without dedicated bus lanes, these types of delays will increasingly encourage riders to drive.
Robotaxis, however high-tech they may seem, are still just cars at their core. Cars that, like their predecessors, do more harm than good to the city.
They contribute to traffic congestion, air pollution, and undermine the quality of life in cities. This is precisely why activists in San Francisco stopped robotaxis last year by placing orange traffic cones on the hoods of their cars, protesting the further entrenchment of car-centric transportation in a city that is trying to reduce its reliance on cars. While Waymo bills itself as the new partner to public transportation, its embrace of the sector is primarily a smart political move. The company hopes that public transportation’s positive image will rub off on its self-driving technology. But the reality is that robotaxis aren’t helping public transportation; they’re actually undermining it.
