Transport Committee on March 28th, 2018

[Dr. Denis Gingras]

Sorry, that was zero to what?

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Level 0 to level 5—how many cars will there be that are like today, level 0, and how many cars will be level 3, and how many cars will be level 5?

I have two questions, very briefly. First, what will the fleet mix be of vehicles on the road in 2030 among the different levels of autonomous driving? Second, what will the percentage of new vehicle sales be in 2030 among the different levels of autonomous driving?

Those are my two questions for the two groups of witnesses.

[Dr. Denis Gingras]

Thank you for your question.

It's a bit tricky to make precise predictions for this—we need a crystal ball—but there will definitely be a kind of hybrid traffic. If you look at the pace of evolution of the technology, right now we have achieved ADSs, automated driving systems, that are commercially available between levels 2 and 3. I assume probably in 2030, 12 years from now, you'll probably have level 4 vehicles commercially available, but probably not level 5. I would really doubt that.

There are so many parameters involved in terms of the business model: social acceptance, how the OEMs will deal with the marketing strategy in selling these automated vehicles and autonomous vehicles, how the insurance companies will react to that, how the legislation will evolve, what kind of collaboration there will be between people in charge of the road infrastructure versus the people in charge of the vehicles, all the different sharing mobility strategies—

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Do you think that, by 2030, the vast majority of vehicles will be at the third and fourth levels of automation?

[Dr. Denis Gingras]

I'd say probably half and half.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

To our other two witnesses, do they have quantitative protections? Obviously we're not going to hold you to this—

[John Wall]

I completely agree there's a lot of talk about level 5 autonomous drive, but that's very far off, and 2030 is not when it's going to happen. Level 5 means go anywhere, anytime, under any conditions.

The programs we're working on today are L-3 plus and L-4. These are typically 2023-24 time frames. It trickles down typically to the less expensive vehicle. If I had to hazard a guess, based on the programs we're working on, I'd say that you're going to see probably 30% L-4 and L-4 plus, 30% L-3 and L-3 plus, and probably 40% L-2 in that time frame. There are just different levels of safety features.

The OEMs that we speak to talk about conditioning the public with safety features preventing accidents—not necessarily about autonomous drive, but automated driving which is—

Go ahead.

[Grant Courville, Head, Product Management, QNX Software Systems Limited]

I was going to say that the thing to keep in mind as well is there is no big switch that's going to be thrown. All of the millions and hundreds of millions of vehicles you have globally that are on the road today aren't just going to go away. There's what's on the road today, and just as we have level 2 vehicles today, today the vast majority of vehicles on the road aren't even connected, so the transition period to get to, say, any kind of majority of automated and autonomous cars is easily decades away.

[John Wall]

Yes. When I talk about the distribution, I'm talking about new cars sold in 2030.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Go ahead, Mr. Badawey.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have to say this is going to be a monumental process going probably decades ahead into the future. I want to ask you the same questions I asked the previous witnesses who were here about a half an hour ago.

It doesn't necessarily attach itself to the technology, because the technology is going to be driven by two sources: the customer, in terms of establishing their needs, and then the industry itself to try to meet those needs with that new technology. What I want to discuss is how we as government, with U.S. partners, prepare for that new technology when it comes to establishing conducive investments for infrastructure.

The second example is ensuring that we facilitate the integration of methods of transportation as it relates to road, rail, air, and water, because we're not just talking about cars on the roads, buses on the roads, trucks on the roads; we're also talking about ships in the water, trains on the tracks, and airplanes in the air.

The last one is business logistics and distribution to ensure that lobbies, vehicles, and methods of transportation are moving around nationally and internationally, that they integrate methods of transportation while integrating the different business and logistics distribution interests.

I would throw one more in there as it relates to revenue opportunities. There is no question that with the new ability to collect data, there are going to be new revenue opportunities for those who are in the industry, but equally as important, if not more important, is that there are going to be revenue opportunities for customers to be able to collect that data with their own methods and do what they want with it to create revenue opportunities for themselves individually.

With that all said, I want to pick your brains and listen to you in terms of your thoughts on those different bullets that I've brought up, and I'm looking for the “how” to the “what” with respect to attaching ourselves as government and as partners and preparing ourselves with infrastructure, integration, business logistics, and data integration.

It's all for you.

[Grant Courville]

I think you mentioned infrastructure investment. Traditionally, people think of infrastructure as bricks and mortar, concrete, etc. I think the thought has to be towards technology and connectivity. In infrastructure investments looking forward, you have to look at vehicle-to-vehicle connectivity, vehicle-to-traffic-light connectivity, and what not, and put programs together to help accelerate and drive that, as opposed to what we traditionally call infrastructure. I think that would definitely be one area.

Also, safety features can be democratized in the sense that they can be available across vehicle lines. That often is driven by volume, just pure economics. The example I always like to use is government stepped in and mandated rear-view cameras in cars. What happened? By 2018, every vehicle has a camera in it. The cost has come way down. The industry adapted. I think we can look for opportunities like that, where government to step in and accelerate that process.

[John Wall]

From a monetization perspective, I think the bigger change in automotive, although we all talk about autonomous drive and automated drive, will be the change in the architecture of the vehicle. There's going to be an ecosystem built around the car.

The best comparison is Android for the phone. There will be an Android for the car. There will be two or three ecosystems, just as today there are iOS and Android, but it won't be Android, because there are very specific properties around security and safety.

However, I think there's a huge opportunity. The car makers are looking at a completely different business model of how to make money in the future. Part of it is data, and the other part is how they sell services into the car. The way people will own cars will be very different in the future. You may own a convertible during the summer and then a sport utility during the winter, but people are going to want their features to follow those cars—seating positions, for example. When people talk about a smart phone on wheels, it actually is headed in that direction.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

You both make a good point with respect to infrastructure and the new normal of what that infrastructure is. When you look at gridlock, for example, digging a bit deeper we can now find ways to eliminate that by timing perfectly not only the infrastructure, but the vehicles that are taking advantage of that infrastructure. Now you've got a seamless movement and flow, strategically timed to eliminate gridlock and have better environmental outcomes, etc.

To your point with respect to data, who actually will be the benefactor of that data when it comes to the financial revenues that will be created from it?

[John Wall]

That will be very interesting.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Is it the companies or is it the individual?

[John Wall]

Why do you think Google wants to get into cars? It's about data. It's all about data. The OEMs know they can monetize it, but they don't know how yet.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Then again, if you take it a step further, it might be the individuals who take advantage of the Google apps who can sell the data, versus Google or the actual car companies.

[John Wall]

It remains to be seen, but today Google and Facebook make all the money.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

It's on to Mr. Aubin.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This discussion is exciting. I will dive in right away.

Mr. Gingras, with your presentation, a light bulb went off in my head when you talked about the just-in-time model, which we launched when greenhouse gases were not such a known problem.

Do these technological developments in transportation also require reflection on the need to revise our economic models, or are we strictly focusing on the notions of transportation, vehicles and automation?

[Dr. Denis Gingras]

Absolutely. I think mobility and transportation are just two of the pillars of our society. Right now, many notions about how we live and how our society works need to be questioned. We just have to think about climate change, social inequalities, cybersecurity or threats to democracy. Mobility is one of the pillars of the development of our society, since it allows people to go to the office, school or grocery store, or to transport goods. This physical mobility is therefore necessary, in parallel with the mobility of data and knowledge that information systems allow us to exchange.

If we really want to solve the major problems we face in terms of mobility and transportation, we will have to look at this entire issue holistically, in a comprehensive way. We will also have to have the courage to make painful decisions about our current economic models.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Santens, I noticed earlier that you wanted to react to personal data. Let me give you the opportunity to do so.

[Scott Santens]

Yes, thank you.

I just wanted to mention that as far as monetization of data is concerned, I think it's important, as regards the future, that we stress that people do own their data. If as lawmakers you set the precedent that people own their data, then it makes sense not only from a privacy perspective that the data cannot be leaked and resold, but also that when it is sold and people agree to its being sold, they receive something in return for it.

It's interesting too that there's data that most people think of as data, but there's also ambient data, which is the data that we generate just by being ourselves, doing nothing, walking along the street near a camera. There's a lot of data out there that isn't necessarily seen as data, but it is.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Courville and Mr. Wall, I have a more technical question for you.

We always hear that automated vehicles are safer, since their computers react faster than humans. However, all the examples that I am given are where the car stops faster than I could in order to avoid an accident.

But last year, I managed miraculously, but also thanks to my driving technique, to avoid being involved in a pileup caused by black ice. In that case, the solution was not to stop, but to perform a controlled skid. Are automated vehicles capable of doing that?