

Google's Trillion-Dollar Driverless Car: How Google Wins - patrickk
http://www.forbes.com/sites/chunkamui/2013/02/12/googles-trillion-dollar-driverless-car-part-4-how-google-wins-2/

======
patrickk
Has anyone pondered what it could mean if Google hypothetically partnered with
Tesla for it's initial rollout of driverless cars? Just some fun speculation
on my part.

The advantages (in my opinion):

\- Going driverless means a threat to existing, big car companies since there
would likely be less cars needed on the road. Partnering with Tesla would
sidestep that - it would allow Tesla to ramp up production of it's electric
cars, and would fit nicely with Elon Musk's stated life goal of making energy
consumption sustainable (along with sustainable energy generation - SolarCity,
and making humanity a multi-planetary species - SpaceX).

\- Google would get a partner that would be likely to enthusiastically embrace
driverless.

\- An investment in Tesla by Google would provide a huge cash boost to open
new factories, expand it's existing factory, re-tool for new Tesla models. It
would greatly aid Tesla's goal of mass producing the electric vehicle.

\- Driverless technology gets around the initial range issues for EV batteries
while the technology is new - a driverless, electric car would bring you to
the office door, drop you off, and drive down to the basement to recharge
itself until summoned via smartphone for the commute home.

\- Simpler, cheaper servicing and running costs since EVs have less parts - no
oil filters, radiators, gearboxes, drive trains, heavy engines (and
potentially pedals, steering wheels etc if driverless). The twin technologies
of electric and driverless means the cars are more reliable, as there's less
parts to break, cheaper (once initial technology costs drop), lighter and
greener (as the bill of materials for a driverless electric is a fraction of
that of a regular 4 cylinder gasoline car). If every car on the road was
electric and driverless, most/all vehicle safety equipment could be eliminated
along with accidents - less weight, hence more range for lithium-ion
batteries, and cheaper vehicles as less parts are needed to manufacture them.

\- For re-fueling, EVs don't need to drive to a dedicated re-fueling spot,
they can charge up in the same house/workplace/shopping center that a
passenger is going to anyway.

Thoughts?

~~~
dm2
That would be great, it would just be a $400,000 vehicle right now. It would
be an awesome machine.

Larry Page and Sergey Brin have invested in Tesla since it's beginning. I
think they both own a Tesla Roadster and probably both own a Model S (wouldn't
you if you had $20 billion).

Tesla could either sell batteries and the electric powertrain to Google or
Google will could just autonomous vehicle technology to Tesla and others. Musk
likes to sell it's technologies and parts to other companies.

Imagine if the car drove off to charge itself. There wouldn't be any
miscalculated trips (like the NY times article). The car could be programmed
to not let you run out of energy.

It's coming, just hang tight. There are a lot of people fighting this kind of
technology (not sure why, money) and that's unfortunate.

The best part of autonomous vehicles would be turning around the front seats
to eat, sleep, play cards, anything. Autonomous vehicles will provide a whole
new industry for America, new parts, news services, new shops. It's a good
thing, I guess.

Apple needs to get in the "helping the world" business. They should invest
some of their $100 billion in future technologies. The world made everyone at
apple extremely rich, and Steve Jobs was never the charitable type, isn't it
time Apple gave back to humanity? $5 billion from Apple would be nothing to
them, but would be everything to a company like Tesla.

The military could even invest in Tesla. I'm sure they would have tons of uses
for high-quality batteries and electric powertrains.

Tesla sure has a bright future ahead of them. As soon as a bad review comes
out they respond publicly and are not afraid to call out bad journalists.

