I've never understood why driverless cars are the solution everyone is obsessed with. Surely better train and bus networks would solve the issue, and then add some bike lanes (golf cart compatible for those with accessibility needs) and you'd also tackle the obesity crisis. But no, I guess that's just not quite enough 'convenience' for people.
Well I can explain why I thought driverless cars were great when I was in highschool. A perception of cars being necessary and the idea that driverless cars solve most of the issues with cars, like accidents parking and traffic (to a degree). I only changed that opinion when I became more informed of the idea of car dependency and how it affects cities.
I already don't want 'em now. Fuck cars that're so loaded with tech, you can't do shadetree repairs, and have abysmally bad sightlines requiring more safety tech to offset shit design.
This may be true, but reduced car ownership will not solve many issues with cars, like the vehicle miles travelled. If we don't change our lifestyles, we will still emit a lot of CO2. Here is a Dutch graph (maybe you can translate it, otherwise let me know!) showing that only that the production of the car causes less than half the CO2 emissions for EV's (the second to last one in the graph).
If we want to reduce emissions more than that, which we really need to do, we need to find something else, like biking, which is way cleaner.