NOVA

A lethal technology we can't live without.

But what if cars got smarter?

Automated vehicles offer the promise

of dramatically reducing collisions and fatalities

on our roads and highways.

The big dream is to make a car

that will never be responsible for a collision.

The potential payoff is huge.

In the mid-2030s, the market could be worth

a few trillion U.S. dollars, with a T in there.

Pursuing that pot of gold,

companies are already testing their cars on our streets.

This is a bold and ambitious mission.

Is this the beginning of a mobility revolution?

We're venturing into domains

that ten years ago would be deemed science fiction.

Or are we simply moving too fast?

The technologies are deeply flawed.

It's just simply not ready for public consumption.

Will we ever be safe with a robot behind the wheel?

"Look Who's Driving,"

right now, on "NOVA."

Major funding for "NOVA" is provided by the following:

911, what is your emergency?

Um, yes, I, um... I hit a bicyclist.

Do you need paramedics?

I don't, but they do.

Every day in the United States,

there are about 100 fatal car crashes.

But on March 18, 2018,

one attracts particular attention,

because the woman behind the wheel, Rafaela Vasquez,

is not driving... a computer is.

The crash puts a spotlight on a controversial new technology:

the self-driving car.

So what exactly happened?

Well, the car was in auto-drive.

Uh-huh.

And all of a sudden, I...

The car didn't see it, I didn't see it.

And all of a sudden, she's just there.

But she shot out in front.

And then I think I... I know I hit 'em.

The victim is 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg.

The car that kills her is being tested by Uber,

the ride-hailing company.

It's a modified Volvo equipped

with Uber's self-driving technology.

Test drives are permitted in Arizona,

as long as there's a safety driver to take over

in case of trouble.

But on this night, Uber's experiment badly fails.

Elaine Herzberg is the first person in history

killed by a self-driving car.

A woman was pushing a bike across a road.

This is the sweet spot, in theory,

where autonomy would be at its best,

particularly compared to humans,

who have terrible vision at night.

And I think that's a, sadly, um, it's a very good example

of just how far away from safe these cars really are.

Now, the question I have for you guys is,

do you guys have remote access

to the cameras and stuff like that that are in there?

We technically should, yeah.

Herzberg's death quickly becomes an international story.

Killed on the street by a self-driving Uber car...

Uber is now suspending all of its self-driving testing...

Self-driving cars under intense scrutiny after...

Uber's C.E.O. tweeting, "Incredibly sad news.

We're thinking of the victim's family..."

So the question here is, "What went wrong?"

The Tempe crash stokes public fears

about self-driving cars.

Nearly three out of four Americans

say they'd be afraid to ride in one.

So why is anyone even trying

to make a car that drives itself?

Self-driving vehicles don't get distracted.

They don't get fatigued, uh, they don't fall asleep.

Uh, and, you know, they don't drive drunk.

In other words, they promise safety.

Each year in the U.S.,

some 35,000 people die in car crashes,

nearly all caused by human error.

They're because of a choice or an error that we make,

a choice to pick up the phone,

drive drunk, drive drugged, drive distracted, drive drowsy.

You're looking one direction

when you should have been watching in the other direction.

94% of crashes.

The hope is that computers

will be able to do a better job.

I really believe

that with self-driving cars,

we will eliminate road accidents.

If we get the technology right,

those cars will know everything

about the road situation, the road condition,

well before a human would.

So that if there is somebody running around the corner

about to jump in front of the car,

the car will know that, and there will be no accidents.

This is the dream.

And that dream is about much more than safety.

Proponents say self-driving cars could bring about

the biggest changes in transportation

since horses gave way to the automobile.

Instead of having to own a car,

people could simply summon one from a circulating fleet

of robotaxis,

reducing the number of cars on the road,

cutting pollution,

and eliminating the need to have so many private cars

sitting idle all day long.

For people who can't drive,

self-driving cars could also provide greater mobility.

You can put your kid on an autonomous car,

and it will take him to school, and problem solved.

Some see a future where cars talk to each other,

reducing traffic jams.

Others are less sure.

It could also

lead to the nightmare scenario, as well,

where inexpensive mobility

leads to dramatic consumption of mobility,

congested freeways, unsustainable use of energy,

and an acceleration of climate change

and other issues that we're facing now.

This is a disruption.

I would call this "Mobility 2.0."

If, if cars today is 1.0,

and, uh, horse carriages was 0.0,

this is a new era of mobility.

An era which in some places seems very close at hand.

Like here, on the streets of San Francisco.

All right, I'm going to go ahead

and slide to go.

So we're off on our autonomous way.

Jesse Levinson demonstrates

how his company's self-driving car

navigates the city streets.

On the screen here,

you can see what the vehicle is planning to do.

That's the green corridor.

The display shows how the route is constantly adjusted

in response to data from cameras

and scanners that use radar and lasers.

The system is designed to handle anything that might happen.

But on test drives, the company always has a safety driver.

Here's a really interesting situation

we're about to encounter,

is a six-way unprotected intersection.

This intersection is so complicated,

I'm not sure I know how to drive it.

But what we're doing here is, we're going to make a left turn.

We're checking all the oncoming traffic.

The car scans its surroundings

to determine if its path is clear.

We're also yielding for all these pedestrians

in the crosswalk.

The computer won't allow the car to proceed

until it's safe.

And literally tracking hundreds of dynamic agents

at the same time.

Now, we've just made our way back.

That was a 100% autonomous drive

with absolutely no manual interventions.

Pretty cool, huh?

Test drives like this are impressive.

But some warn it will be a long time

before computers can consistently drive more safely

than humans do.

Because driving, though it may seem easy,

is actually a very difficult task.

Let me make the following bold assertion.

Driving is the most complex activity

that most adults on the planet engage in

on a regular basis.

When we drive, the vehicle is moving,

the environment is changing on a continuing basis,

all these pieces of information actually coming

towards our senses, goes to the brain,

The brain basically applies the rules of the road.

And for the most part, we drive safely.

Each of the 35,000 annual crash deaths in the U.S.

is tragic.

But they're statistically rare.

On average, there's only one

for every 100 million miles of driving.

That translates into 3.4 million hours of driving.

3.4 million hours is 390 years

of continuous, 24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week driving

in between fatal crashes.

That's a very high bar for technology to clear.

Think about our modern electronic devices

that are powered by software that we use every day.

And try to imagine that those devices could run

without ever giving you the spinning blue doughnut

that said it's not ready to give you the answer you wanted.