Pop the top and blue sky with me

Have you ever "blue-skyed" about an uninvented technology, or thought of a way that a current technology could get even better?

Even if you aren't "technical", please read the following press release from Siemens and imagine the possibilities:

The Siemens Industrial Solutions and Services Group (I&S) has received an order from Puget Sound Regional Council, Seattle, in the U.S. state of Washington, to implement a satellite-supported road pricing system as a pilot project, during which around 500 vehicles are to be fitted with on-board units (OBUs). With the help of the Global Positioning System (GPS), the position of the vehicle is detected in real time. The OBUs use GSM technology to communicate with a management control center where the user accounts are kept. The aim of the pilot project is to assess the feasibility of a use-dependent electronic pricing system. Another objective is to investigate the levels of acceptance encountered by the new system among motorists and the American public. Introduction of this system, unique in North America, is scheduled for the middle of 2004.

Using this system, drivers could be charged by the mile depending on how they use the roadways. States currently have gas taxes, but new, more fuel-efficient cars mean less gas tax revenue. Plus, there's a difference between driving a gallon's worth on an uncongested freeway and driving the same distance on the same freeway during rush hour. And, heavy trucks pay the same gas tax as small passenger cars, yet they cause much more damage to the roadways. Why shouldn't they pay their fair share?

This new system could allow a true, fair, level playing field for drivers. Those drivers who spend a lot of time on a freeway downtown during rush hour will pay more; those who drive during off-peak hours will pay less. Drivers could start allocating how much time they spend on each type of street. You don't leave your tap running all day because you don't want to pay a high water bill. In fact, some utility companies charge a higher rate for peak usage. Why shouldn't driving be the same?

Bear in mind this isn't "rocket science". GPS and GSM (cellular) are both here now and they're very widely used technologies.

And, it's only going to get better! Insurance companies could use this system to lower rates for safe drivers. The GPS could be used to determine how fast a driver goes and even if they change lanes too often. Coupled with data from computerized traffic signals or central traffic control centers, the insurance company could determine whether someone frequently runs red lights or commits other traffic infractions. If you're a safe driver shouldn't you pay a low rate even if you happen to live in a certain zip code? After all, fair's fair, right?

In fact, the police could even use these systems to automatically fine those who speed or park in handicapped parking spaces. And, what if a heinous crime is committed in your neighborhood or against a loved one? The police would be able to subpoena the records of all those drivers who were in the area at the time. The innocent would be eliminated from their list of suspects, and the guilty would be quickly caught. These systems could lead to a very sharp decrease in crime and make our streets very much safer.

Or, imagine if there's a possible terror attack. The police or other authorities could focus in on those drivers in affected areas, and tell them to evacuate immediately and what routes to take. Traffic could be routed on various roads to make sure everyone was safe. The cars of suspected terrorists could be monitored without the need for costly and error-prone physical surveillance.

But, bear in mind, the data recorded by these devices would only be used by those authorized to receive the data. The computer systems can be programmed to only give out information to the various departments of transportation or law enforcement agencies. It's only a few "Nervous Nellies" and "Worried Wilberts" who care about things like "usage creep." To be frank, while some people are concerned about civil liberties, most people are not. Let's face it: if the government wanted to track you, they have other ways to do it.

This is simply a smart - and cost-saving - use of technology that's already available. I applaud its use and I strongly encourage everyone to do the same.

For further reading, see:

"[CA] DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile"

"At 87, [WA] state's transportation guru still a driving force"

"Travel Value Pricing: Better Traffic Operations Management and
New Revenue for the Puget Sound Region"

"Speakers say value pricing could ease Twin Cities congestion"

You can also contact the CA DMV and tell them you fully support this proposal here or by calling their Executive Office at 916-657-6940. Or, call Arnold Schwarzenegger at 916-445-2841. While he hasn't yet seen the light and come out in favor of the wonderful new proposals of his new DMV appointee, it can't hurt to tell him what you think.

Comments

In the same spirit as you, I join in the praise of these wonderful capabilities.

But they don't go far enough. Do they include sensors that detect when you are smoking in the car, or when you are eating red meat or (heaven forbid) fish? This information could be provided directly to life insurance agencies.

And the devices should also have sound sensors that detect the music and radio stations that you listen to. For example, you may have heard that a few radio hotheads (currently subject to a Federal Elections Commission investigation for unfair political practices) have been a mite critical about this new policy. People who listen to this radio station must be neutralized...uh...re-educated to see the error of their ways.

(In all seriousness, I do not fear 1984 because I believe that the different government agencies are too incompetent to ever implement it.)