Innovative study suggests scientific solutions to global transport problems within the next 50 yearsJuliette Jowit The Observer August 26 2007 A remarkable study into the way millions of people will travel in the future reveals a world where cars drive themselves, people could be tagged so they are constantly monitored, and nearly all modes of transport can be run by computers rather than people. Transport Communications, a new book on the future of transport by two New Zealand professors, brings hope that nanotechnology, satellite communications, computer chips - and sleeping pills - could put an end to problems such as congestion, the threat from terrorism and increasing fuel prices. The study also reveals new concerns, ranging from 'Big Brother' fears of a surveillance society to whether there will be an increasing 'obesity time bomb' because homes, vehicles and even clothes will do everything for us. Some of the ideas are already starting to emerge in reality; others read like Isaac Asimov or Ray Bradbury science fiction. Professor Chris Kissling, one of the authors, said congestion for every type of transport and the threat of climate change from burning fossil fuels mean it is no longer possible to rely on traditional solutions. Airports, ports and shipping routes are struggling to cope with the biggest modern planes and ships, which puts constraints on designing even larger modes of transport. '[We're] trying to help people look into the future: what changes are coming, because more of the same, we think, is limited.' Much of this could happen in 50 years, he said. The future, as envisioned by Kissling and co-author John Tiffin, relies heavily on ever smaller computers, global positioning system satellites and nanotechnology. Tiny computer chips and sensors could be used to track crowds through public transport hubs or to check the car in for a service if a fault is detected. Satellites could help the computers guide cars on roads and fly planes or pilot ships remotely, the book says. Nanotechnology could also be used to develop 'clever clothes' for humans, enhancing their abilities to walk or run, carry heavy loads or even 'fly like birds'. It could be used to build goods locally, reducing the need for mass freight. Remaining items would be transported around the world in huge submarines without crews -'behemoths gliding silently beneath the oceans' - where they could be stacked on busy shipping lanes and would not battle the waves. Virtual reality will free people from travelling to meetings unless they want to be with a person, the authors also suggest. The academics do not envisage an end to human contact, though; computers have 'better memories and faster calculating skills... do not get absent- minded, drowsy or drunk', but there will always be a need for the human touch. 'Artificial intelligence is unlikely to acquire the social nuances needed at the captain's table or an air steward's ability to deal with the unusual,' the book says. Like any futurologists, Kissling and Tiffin risk being accused of both repackaging old ideas and wild imaginings. But some of these things are starting to happen: autopilots are common on planes and ships, and cars already tell drivers to buckle up, slow down or change the oil. Other ideas have their roots in current technologies; even clever clothes are an evolution of such things as life jackets or firefighters' suits, said Kissling. Such huge changes would, inevitably, have implications far beyond transport: underwater ships could find new trade routes under the Arctic; 'enhanced pedestrians' might have to be regulated as if they were vehicles. Kissling is concerned about people being tracked, but played down fears of a 'Big Brother' society: 'It's an evolutionary process; when you live in society you give up individual freedoms to society as a whole.' He also dismissed fears that, with machines doing so much, humans will be even more unhealthy. 'Clever clothes could make you get up and get going... it could be part of a health programme,' he argued. 17. Render this article in English. What do you think of this? Would you drive a small car? Why/Why not?
|
