Calif. governor to sign bill to OK driverless cars

Google's top leaders pose in a Google self-driving car. From left to right are Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt, Chief Executive Larry Page, and co-founder Sergey Brin.

/ Google

(AP) MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. - California's governor plans to sign legislation Tuesday at the headquarters of Google Inc. that will pave the way for driverless cars in the state.

Self-driving cars might sound like science fiction, but they are already cruising California's roads and could become sold commercially within the next decade.

Google's fleet of a dozen computer-controlled vehicles - mostly Toyota Priuses equipped with self-driving technology - has logged more than 300,000 miles (482,780 kilometers) of self-driving without an accident, the company said.

The new legislation would establish safety and performance regulations to test and operate autonomous vehicles on state roads and highways.

Gov. Jerry Brown is expected to sign the legislation in Mountain View at Google, which has been developing autonomous car technology and lobbying for the regulations.

65 Photos

Most outrageous cars

Autonomous cars use computers, sensors and other technology to operate independently, but a "driver" can override the autopilot function and take control of the vehicle at any time.

With smartphone-wielding drivers more distracted than ever, backers say robotic vehicles have the potential to make roads significantly safer, noting that nearly all car accidents are a result of human error.

The legislation requires the California Department of Motor Vehicles to draft regulations for autonomous vehicles by Jan. 1, 2015. Currently, state law doesn't mention self-driving cars because the technology is so new.

The regulations would allow vehicles to operate autonomously, but a licensed driver would still need to sit behind the wheel to serve as a backup operator in case of emergency.

The legislation is also aimed at keeping California at the forefront of the autonomous car industry since Stanford University and Silicon Valley companies have been working on the technology for years.

In February, Nevada became the first U.S. state to approve regulations spelling out requirements for companies to test driverless cars on that state's roads.

In recent years, automakers have been introducing autonomous functions such as self-parking, lane departure warnings and adaptive cruise-control, which allows vehicles to automatically accelerate and decelerate with the flow of traffic.

Carmakers such as Audi, BMW, Ford and Volvo have been working on autonomous car technology for years, and experts say commercial vehicles could feature an "autopilot" function in as early as five years.

[karek40]

1. Am I liable when my driverless car has an accident or is the auto manufacturer or perhaps the GPS satellite company when there is a loss of information?
2. What is the cost of liability insurance for all, either/both?
3. The ionosphere disrupts gps occasionally, what does the car do when it loses guidance?
4. Electronics fail (eventually) perhaps not as frequently as man's attention span, so the accidents/lawsuits will decrease and this will deprive some lawyer his livelyhood. It would be intersting to detail the benefits and burdens of this. The car can now be programed to deliver drugs (less risk to the supplier). Spoof the car and someone will probably commit murder and probably get away with it. I could go on, it will be interesting to watch.

[jtb24]

some good points made, but if you had payed any attention to what they where talking about when it aired on tv or in this article. Then you would have known that this system assists the driver. Yes it can drive itself, but the driver still has to be present and can take over at any time. Not to mention, they explained how these cars warn drivers when they're in danger of an accident or stop them from backing into things. Insurance will obviously stay the same because it is an assist to driving and you will still be responsible for what happens. For example, if the cars gps messes up like you said it is not the companies fault. it is your responsibility to take the wheel which automatically turns off the auto driving system. I understand questioning new technology, but next time take common sense and facts into consideration before making a fool of yourself.

[FormerUSMCSergeant]

Considering that so many get licenses without ever learning how to drive, this is a step in the right direction....

[WiseAsOwl]

I have something to say on this... Being a retired truck driver, I was somewhat familiar with the attempts at making "driverless" trucks.. We had the technology... have had it for years... and it looked like a possible way of replacing or getting rid of those dang obnoxious truck drivers. However, they soon found out that they really, really needed a truck driver to be the one left hanging from the nearest cottonwood tree to atone for whatever weaknesses the system had that some(or just any) particular person just HAD to be responsible for. I think that they decided that if the technology really did get rid of the truck driver, that people in management would get blamed and/or fined for when things went wrong. AND, if so, then why bother. It was very similar to their thinking on perfecting an automatic transmission so that ANYBODY and EVERYBODY could drive a semi-truck.. It just ended up pointing out to everybody that there just happened to be a little more to driving a truck than "shifting gears"... You can also bet that the first time somebody gets killed by this driverless car, it's going to be a three-ring circus with everybody trying to decide who is responsible. Any volunteers to be the one to go to jail and face manslaughter charges??? Sure. The technology is there.. and it should be sufficient to do the job at hand... but, I'll bet my money that within three years, this will be a dead subject and everybody will have moved on to some other idea... There HAS to be a "fall guy".

[Bojax39]

" a licensed driver would still need to sit behind the wheel to serve as a backup operator in case of emergency."

Sure... putting somebody behind the wheel with nothing to do but be bored into slumber or engage in a myriad of activities which will put their eyes and attention anywhere but on the road will help loads.

[NevadaImmigrant]

Driverless cars in California? Why not? They already have a driverless governor's office.

[hypnotoad72]

So when the technology fails, who is responsible?

I'm going to say the maker of it, since these gadgets are supposed to supplant humans. Not compel humans to be the backup robot...

I'll stick to old fashioned driving and keeping texting gadgets turned off and, you know, trying to concentrate on others because Heaven knows they are not concentrating...

[Scimajor]

The car you are driving is likely to already be computer controlled in at least some way.

A great number of cars, including the current Prius, are to a large extent "drive by wire" already. There is in fact no direct mechanical connection between the accelerator and the engine or the break pedal and the breaks. All the commands a driver enters through the pedals are run through the computer first. Almost every engine in every new car has computer controlled ignition where a computer tells the cylinder when to fire.

Some of the differences between the Google Prius and a regular Prius are that the computer has a constant 360 degree view (LIDAR) and is perfect at judging breaking distance and speed. The computer is also far more likely to actually follow the rules of the road and not risk the lives of everyone on the road simply to gain 2 car lengths.

If you're really afraid of computer control then never fly on a commercial airplane. The more advanced ones have computers landing the planes (this is particularly true in IFR conditions). The only crashes attributed to autopilots, well sort of, have been when pilots thought they had autopilot turned on and did not.