Thursday, October 4, 2012

Vision 2020: Can You See It?

It was not too long ago where the buckling ourselves into a car seat was cutting edge “technology” for road safety. Technology would grow as our eyes were then opened to safety devices such as airbags, anti-lock braking systems and crumple zones. This was all cutting edge stuff! Well, in 2011, car companies began to publicize an idea that would bring vehicle safety to a whole other level—a crash-proof car. In an article by Lucy Rodgers entitled, “How close are we to a crash-proof car?”, we take a look at the technology behind this idea as well as the reactions it has received since surfacing.

According to the article, 1.3 million people are killed and 50 million injured as a result of car crashes every year. As a result, car companies are “racing” to make this crash-proof car a reality. Among many companies to come out and announce their intent on creating such a model, Volvo’s “Vision 2020”, is one of the most publicized. With this “Vision 2020”, Volvo has pledged that after the year 2020, “no-one will be killed or seriously injured in one of its new cars,” according to the article. The video below demonstrates the confidence Volvo has in the power of this technology. Check it out.

From this, we ask ourselves two questions: First, is this idea of a crash-proof car realistic? And, secondly, if so, will drivers be accepting or willing to purchase a car that overrides their driving? Let’s take a look at the technology that makes this idea even possible. Seen below is a depiction of what this technology is capable of and a video that explains how it works.

"Radar, sonar and other sensors will extend its so-called "deformation zone" until it becomes, in essence, a huge electronic bumper reaching out on all sides to gather information to feed back to the vehicle." (

After evaluating the possibility of a crash-proof car, it is clear that it provides several advantages, the most important of them being the potential for reduced fatalities and injuries. To put the danger of car crashes into perspective, here are a few more statistics from the article. 70% of car crashes that occur in the UK are as a result of operator error. Further, the article mentions that this technology could reduce car crashes causing injury by 28% and reduce the number of deaths by 15%. From these statistics, it is clear why people would support this technology. Besides the point that one could be lazy and multi-task while the car drives itself, it also has the ability to save lives.  And to put the percentages into perspective, this technology has the ability to save almost 200,000 lives each year.

On the other hand, it is arguable that technology that takes responsibility away from the driver makes matters worse. As Peter Rodger explains, “We have to be confident that the engineering can cope with a range of complexities in the same way as a human.” In other words, we are basically placing the same value on the abilities of technology as we do on humans. Some car companies, specifically Volvo, seem to be blind to the fact that technology can fail. If failure occurs, someone’s life is at a high risk. Despite the number of lives the technology might save, it just takes one error to make a bad impression on potential buyers.

In conclusion, as seen in the depiction and video of the present-day technology above, it is evident that this technology is beneficial for drivers across the world. The problem arises when the discussion advances to taking this technology to the next level where the car would take over all driving responsibilities. In my opinion, this is where Volvo’s “2020 Vision” becomes blurred.



  1. Brendan, your article described your topic accurately, stated the facts on the idea sufficiently, and kept your underlying opinion obvious enough for us to understand your feelings on the matter.

    To start off, I am unfamiliar with the future plans of many automotive companies. My knowledge of where companies want to be and what is expected of them is nothing. After reading your article, I can grasp a good idea that safety is the prime concern of the automotive worlds. The statistics you presented highlight the problem. A “crash proof” car would solve this issue, but my main concern comes with the plausibility of that idea. If a “crash proof” car were to be introduced by Volvo ahead of the rest of the companies, what would account for the unexpected? When driving down a suburban road and a stampede of cyclists begin to nudge you across the yellow lines, will the system force you into the pack of the cyclists or into the other side of the road? What happens if there is danger from two sides of the car? Will the new systems in the car run on battery power? And if so, will the equipment perform better or worse depending on battery life?
    The areas of concern with Volvo’s vision, and as Brendan said, is trusting the engineering. For the most part, I am sure the technology will benefit drivers and cut down on the number of accidents, but will it account for every situation. The turnover period from the ordinary, man-operated car to these “crash proof” car has to be smooth enough so it does not turn people off to the idea.

    Another thing to consider is the implications on these breakthroughs to the insurance industry. If cars become”crash proof,” is there a need for insurance? The insurance companies could lose a lot of money from this wave of innovation. A lot to consider, but a lot to look forward to.

  2. Brendan, really interesting topic here, it is crazy to think that Volvo envisions these cars to be out on the road in about 7 years. With the way technology has progressed in the last 10 years, I wouldn’t put it past them.

    Not too long ago, I read an article about this very thing going on in California. Not surprisingly, Google is already on their way to making self-driving cars a reality, and they have set an even bolder goal of having these cars out on the road in as soon as five years. So far, Google has been testing their car in Nevada, the first state to allow this type of driverless car testing to take place. Now California has allowed this testing to go on after the car was able to drive 50,000 miles without human interaction and without incurring any accidents. To clarify, the states require a person to be behind the wheel and to be able to take control of the car if anything goes wrong during the driverless testing. While the cars have racked up 300,000 miles, there was only one accident, which was a fender bender—that happened to take place when a human was in control.

    The technology behind these cars is unbelievable, utilizing radar sensors in the front to maintain distance from other vehicles and to stop when it is needed, video cameras on the other sides of the car to monitor other vehicles, and artificial intelligence is used to steer the car. Of course, people will be skeptical at first, questioning whether or not it is a good idea to trust a computer with their vehicles and essentially with their lives. However, this technology seems like it has the chance to dramatically decrease the fatalities that occur from driving. Of course computers and technology make errors, and it is very bold of Volvo to say that they want to completely eliminate accidents altogether. That goal of theirs might be very difficult to reach by 2020. However, this technology error has got to be significantly less than human error. Build technology that focuses on one thing only and that is driving a car, and eventually it will become sophisticated enough to drive flawlessly. Train a human his entire life to drive flawlessly, and there is still an aspect of human error that can occur every time he gets behind the wheel. There are other humans he needs to watch out for, and there are constant distractions, and even the slightest gaze off the road could prove detrimental. I do not think that Volvo is “completely blind to the fact” that technology can fail, I just think they are aware of the fact that technology will fail a lot less than humans in the long run.

    If one day, all cars are driverless, cars can communicate with each other and know where other cars are at all times and protect the drivers from accidents with reaction times that humans could never match, the fatality rate from car accidents would drop significantly. Setting the goal at 2020 is a good start, and even Google’s goal of 5 years from now is setting into motion the very realistic future of roads that are much safer and no longer result in so many people losing their lives.

    Article about Google's Car in California:

  3. This is a very enthralling article. If cars could take over vehicles fully or intervene to prevent accidents it would be a huge technological breakthrough. It would prevent many deaths and many people would be willing to buy into this.
    I do have some skepticism about how well this could work in the near future. If the car will be fully automatic what would happen if it malfunctioned, as do all other forms of technology. If one of the sensors or computer system were to break in an overriding car it would not work, and it would be back to the old way of driving. Furthermore, if the computer system or sensors failed in an automatic car it could cause death or serious injury. Though it may prevent more deaths than it causes, it would be a huge lawsuit issue for the companies making them. The malfunctions would also prove Volvo’s bold statement of “no-one will be killed or seriously injured in one of its new cars,” to be wrong.
    The more technology put into the car the more chance of a failure. Cars already have issues without all of the technology. The maintenance on these cars would cost a massive amount for both mechanical and technological issues. In addition, the initial cost of this car would more than likely be many times more than a typical car. The high costs would bar some people from having them. At first this would be an upper class item and would not do much to the death statistic.
    Furthermore, if all of the cars are not these non-crash cars then you cannot fully prevent crashes. There will still be typical drivers on the road making mistakes. It is very difficult for a non-crash car to react quickly enough when a drunk driver is coming at them at excess speeds. The cars can protect themselves form causing accidents but can regular cars still cause accidents with non crash cars? If they can perfect this technology it would be great.
    I believe a non-crash car is a great idea. It would change society completely. If this technology can be perfected it is a huge feat for technology, but I do not believe it can be perfected in the near future. There are too many “what if” ‘s that these cars may not be able to react to.

  4. Technology is now more cutting edge than ever. The auto industry is a major sign of growing technology. First, cars started to come out with back up cameras. This allowed the driver to be able to see what is behind him, even in his blind spot. Shortly after this, cars were able to park themselves. Now, on everyday commercials, cars are being advertised that they have auto stop; this allows the car to brake immediately if it senses something behind it. It also prevents the car from swerving into another lane, causing an accident. Volvo is currently in the works with creating its first car that will be able to drive itself,; and in return greatly reduce the number of accidents.

    I feel that this is a great idea. People now a day are just too busy in their own life to focus on driving. They feel that answering a phone call is so important that they would put their life at risk while driving. This type of technology will be good for the everyday working mom who owns her own business. She is often busy trying to run a business, as well as picking the kids up from school and bringing them to all their extracurricular activities. A car that could drive itself would allow this type of person to get all their errands done, as well as, handle their business more efficiently. Driving a car would be one less thing that someone has to focus on.

    Although this does have many advantages for the busy American, there can also be a downfall to this type of car. Technology has the ability to malfunction. With Volvo creating the first car that can drive itself, all the kinks are probably not worked out. If there was a car swerving into your lane, would the car know to quickly try to get into the next lane to avoid a crash, or would it stay in the lines because that is what it is programed to do? What if there is road construction ahead in the lane that you are in, does the car know to get over or will it just barrel through? These are the type of flaws that worry me about this kind of car.

    I would love to see this car succeed, because of the thousands of lives that it can potentially save. I just feel that malfunctions are possible and that the auto companies should try to think through every possible scenario that could go wrong with the car before it becomes available to the public.

  5. When I first read over this article the first issue that I thought it would have is safety. As you said technology can fail, and it does. I can not tell you how many stories I have heard about computers crashing, cellphone breaking and machines dying. I am thinking if someone was relaxing on their commute to work and all of a sudden the car breaks or dies, it will lead to an accident. Today if an accident is about to happen you can control what you will hit, how fast you are going, etc if you are paying attention. When using this technologically advanced car, drivers, or I guess you would call them passengers, would not be paying as much attention as they would be if they were manually driving. The lack of attention may cause death and serious injuries if the car were to break during usage.

    I know that cars today already have the knowledge of being able to park themselves. Also, in class we have discussed the innovations of the top of the line car companies adding additional safety features to prevent accidents, such as, the car not allowing you to switch lanes if there is another car in the blind spot. I find it extremely hard to trust technology when it comes to my own safety. If I had a car with these new features, I would still do everything on my own. I do not think that our generation will adjust to these cars well. Volvo is going to have to target people who have not manually driven a car. I understand that you can also manually drive this new car, but I am sure that most people will use the auto-drive feature. It is much like Second Life. We do not see how kids in the future will be able to hang out through this service. Instead of physically seeing one another their lives will be filled with virtual relationships. Second life is going to have to be targeting the next generation because of the fact the our generation does not see a use for it. My parents still do not understand why we text so much and why we do not call each other; I think that our generation will be that way about why people can not drive the car manually.

    On the other hand, if the car went through extensive testing I would like to use it. I would finally be able to eat breakfast, talk on the phone, etc. on my way to do errands or long car rides. I also think that this will change the jobs of truck drivers. Truck drivers have limited amount of hours that they can drive per day, but maybe this innovative car can create new laws for their driving capabilities. I think that Volvo is creating a product that consumers would be interested an intrigued by, but on the flip side this car will have to go through years testing before it will become common.