Filed under: Concept Cars, Hybrids/Alternative
MIT rethinks the city car
Among other things, the MIT Media Lab "Smart Cities" project has been working on new concepts for city cars, going far beyond cars that are simply smaller, such as the stackable, shared-car concept shown above in the course prospectus.
The project, which has been in progress since 2003, is sponsored by General Motors, which is planning build a concept car using the MIT design in 2006. An article in Thursday's edition of The Guardian, describes the shared-car concept (think future ZipCar or FlexCar) as "a stackable, shareable, electric, two-passenger car." While our colleagues at Engadget think the car's a big improvement on the last urban transportation revolution, the Segway, they wonder if some of the concepts might be too far out there to implement - even in a concept car.
Among other innovative concepts, the Smart Cities cars include "motor-wheels": a wheel unit that includes an embedded electric motor and suspension, doing away with a conventional drivetrain, and allowing dramatic design flexibility. Much more information here and here.
[Via ZDNet Emerging Technology Trends]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Sparkdog 9:48PM (12/30/2005)
I am just curious as if that is powerful enough to go up the hills of San Fransisco.
Reply
Lithous 10:07PM (12/30/2005)
I guess they HAVE to be shareable if they are stackable. 'Cause if you are the third guy in then you are either going to have to get in the last car and drive away (shareable) or you wait for the other two guys to come back. I'm not impressed with (thier) stackable.
BTW, "... is sponsored by General Motors, which is planning build a concept car ...", I think "to" is missing from the sentence.
Reply
distantbody 7:09AM (12/31/2005)
As ideal as this concept is, it is a fataly flawed one. This concept lacks incentive enough to change an entire citys habits. As pretty as blindly sharing is, THERE ARE DAMN GOOD REASONS WHY PEOPLE DONT SHARE! As much as I could elaborate, I will instead leave you with the simple crux of the argument: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
Reply
Chris Meisenzahl 9:20AM (12/31/2005)
Well said distantbody! That's a great point.
Chris
http://amateureconblog.blogspot.com/
Reply
EGS Machine 11:09AM (12/31/2005)
I think these concepts are trying to hard to change society into an ideal situation. I think they should not focus so much on reinvention; though good for the company, it is not so good for society and part of the reason why these concepts remain concepts.
My position, evaluate the way cars are used and find better solution there. How do I use my car? How much does it cost? Where do I need to go and what do I need to do when I get there? All are questions that require reinvention and dehumanize the experiences like spontaneity and freedom. I wish I had the answers to these questions. As we are each unique (some how, in some way), the answers will vary. Then we get into the Tragedy of Commons, as stated above.
Reply
m-am 7:36AM (1/04/2006)
i just looked at wikipedia's article on the tragedy of the commons... and you know what...
the private car in public space is a perfect example of it (it's even in the modern commons examples)! and for quite a few reasons: congestion, pollution, climate change, noise, safety (safer to drive a truck than a bike so get a suv!), oil depletion...
so public city cars might be a _solution_ to the tragedy of the commons of the private car in cities and not some new marginal tragedy of the commons as you suggest.
big cities are already putting in place the big incentives you are talking about. to drive in London and Stockholm, you pay big bucks. to have a car in HK, i believe you need to prove that you have a parking spot which cost quite a bit, etc. personnaly i'd vote for a city council that says you share cars in the city or you pay big bucks!
so please do elaborate on your DAMN GOOD REASONS WHY PEOPLE DONT SHARE... do you have your own shopping cart so as not to share one? do you refuse to go to the movie theatre because someone else sat on the same seat? do you not take the plane or rental cars for the same reason? do you have anything against sharing the same highway or parking place as others? do you buy a cow so as not to share its milk with others?
human beings have made it this far by sharing. no one can be totally self sufficient on his own. if you think you're different, why dont you go live on some asteroid by yourself!
are you even aware that you are breathing the same air as everyone else?
at least you don't seem to have anything against sharing your thoughts...
Reply