backtop


Print 60 comment(s) - last by FiveTenths.. on Jul 18 at 9:52 AM

The Obama administration hopes to have a V2V proposal put forth by 2017

Although we don’t have an exact date for when it will become mandatory, vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication technology will inevitably be found on all new cars and trucks. V2V technology allows vehicles to not only wirelessly communicate with each other (broadcasting information such as position, speed, etc.), but also with their surroundings in order to reduce the number of traffic accidents and road fatalities/injuries.
 
"Vehicle-to-vehicle technology represents the next generation of auto safety improvements, building on the life-saving achievements we've already seen with safety belts and air bags," remarked U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx back in February. "By helping drivers avoid crashes, this technology will play a key role in improving the way people get where they need to go while ensuring that the U.S. remains the leader in the global automotive industry."
 
Now, President Barack Obama is throwing his weight behind V2V technology. In a speech delivered this morning at Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, President Obama stated that V2V technology could:
  • Reduce up to 80 percent of the 32,000 road deaths each year in America
  • Significantly reduce the 2 million non-fatal injuries
  • Save society $800 billion annually in costs
President Obama reminded audience members that he is not just the Commander-in-Chief, but he is also a father of two. “As the father of a daughter who just turned 16, any new technology that makes driving safer is important to me,” said Obama. “New technology that makes driving smarter is good for the economy.”
 
V2V technology has a number of backers, including major automakers like Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai-Kia, Toyota, Nissan, and Volkswagen. These automakers are working alongside the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute to research real-world applications of the technology and to provide guidance for legislation. In fact, the Obama administration hopes to reveal its proposal for a V2V mandate before the next administration takes office.

 Vehicle-to-Vehicle technology would allow cars and trucks to communicate with each other wirelessly.

However, not everyone is onboard with V2V technology. The Detroit News reported back in March that it could add up to $3,000 to the cost of a new car by the year 2025. In addition, many feel that such technology should be optional instead of mandated (although that would significantly cut down on its effectiveness and the President’s goals for reducing fatalities).
 
Others point to the fact that many technologies already available in cars today like blind spot/lane departure monitors, frontal collision detection, and radar/laser cruise control systems (which in some instance can “drive” a vehicle during stop-and-go traffic) already do enough to help prevent accidents.

Source: The Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Great technology
By Zgare on 7/15/2014 10:51:53 PM , Rating: 2
I am amazed that so many commenters don't get it. This isn't politics. 33,000 lives and $800 billion per per year per Fox News. (Google Fox and $817 billion). Is it just old fashioned racism, or can you all be this stupid. I am grateful this tech has someone's attention at the presidential level. Otherwise we will be buying the technology from China. If we could somehow apply the $800 billion per year to the National Debt, we could pay it all off in about 20 years. Or pay for all public education including all teacher salaries through high school every damn year. Some things are not a Fox joke. Don't kill crashless cars for America just because you've been told to hate everything about a president that ends wars and gets affordable healthcare to the poor. Try thinking for yourself. Polls showed everyone supported Nixon at one time. You could be wrong.




RE: Great technology
By wookie1 on 7/16/2014 12:20:03 PM , Rating: 2
I tried to make sense out of your post and find a point, but I failed. You flailed around with something about racism, paying off the national debt, public education, and healthcare for the poor, and I just can't see how remote control of a car can impact any of these things. Nobody is commenting to "kill" the "crashless car", they just don't want to be forced to buy it. If it's such a worthy and valuable feature, it will not need a government mandate.

I'm not sure if your post is sarcastic actually, maybe I read it totally wrong. You mention a president that ends wars and provides healthcare for the poor, which clearly can't refer to our current president. Tell us which wars have ended? The poor have had Medicaid coverage for decades, so no change there. As far as applying savings from something to pay the debt, I think we all know that regardless of who heads up the govt they will spend all the money they can manage to borrow. If there is extra money somehow, it isn't going to go towards the debt when there are so many favors to dole out to get elected.


"So, I think the same thing of the music industry. They can't say that they're losing money, you know what I'm saying. They just probably don't have the same surplus that they had." -- Wu-Tang Clan founder RZA














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki