The City of the Future According to Elon Musk

Elon Musk is on a mission to transform the way cities are powered. We look at how his plans could shape our future world, and whether we want them to

Elon Musk wants to change the world. Almost inarguably, he has done so already, both in past endeavours with the creation of PayPal, and more recently with his Space X efforts, as the CEO of the first private company to send a spacecraft to the International Space Station.

But the future, as partially laid out in the Tesla Master Plan Part Deux, holds even more promise and, if Musk is successful in his ambition, could see the entrepreneur change aspects of our lives almost beyond recognition.

The question thus begged is: do we want him to?

The Potential of Power

In the aforementioned Master Plan Part Deux, it was announced that Tesla would be merging with SolarCity, both Musk companies that have thus far run separately. By combining the two, the intention is to bring together Tesla’s power storage technology with SolarCity’s panels. Or, as he put it in the Master Plan, “create stunning solar roofs with seamlessly integrated battery storage”.

These solar roofs will not just be a module on the existing roof but act as the roof itself. And they will inevitably be operating in conjunction with Tesla Powerwall, the home battery designed to charge from solar during the day then power your home during the evening.
Ultimately, the intention seems to be for Tesla/SolarCity equipped houses to go off-grid, achieving a net zero energy rating in which their consumption is only as much as their production.

Image courtesy of OnInnovation. Featured image courtesy of Jag_cz / Shutterstock.com

Image courtesy of OnInnovation. Featured image courtesy of Jag_cz / Shutterstock.com

In Musk’s words: “The point of all this was, and remains, accelerating the advent of sustainable energy, so that we can imagine far into the future and life is still good. That’s what ‘sustainable’ means. It’s not some silly, hippy thing – it matters for everyone.”

The importance of the continued development of sustainable energy is obvious and, with innovations such as Harvard’s ‘bionic leaf’, the plausibility of large-scale replacement of fossil fuel dependency is increasing. To take the idea to its furthest conclusion, we must imagine a future in which houses, possibly even entire cities, are powered by sustainable energy alone.

At most, the grid would act as a sort of backup generator in case of emergency or excess demand. Perhaps the grid will not exist at all, supplanted by greener measures.

Means of Production

Musk is in the energy game on multiple fronts but it’s the way he’s applying it at Tesla that is perhaps most revelatory. We already knew that Tesla planned to expand its product line and that it was working on autonomous vehicles.

What we didn’t all know until the latest entry in the Master Plan was that the product line expansion will see Tesla offering commercial vehicles alongside affordable cars, and that the autonomous development has far loftier aims than a base level of self-driving vehicles.

The next few years may well see the roads filling up with Teslas, all of which will, by one means or another, ultimately be recharged by solar power

To look first at the expansion of Tesla’s product range, it has announced development of both heavy-duty trucks and high passenger-density urban transport. Both will of course be electric.

Alongside cornering the market on affordable-to-run municipal vehicles, Tesla is expanding into vehicles aimed at the standard consumer, with the new Model 3 starting at a price of $35,000.

As a result of the expansion into low-cost vehicles, the next few years may well see the roads filling up with Teslas, all of which will, by one means or another, ultimately be recharged by solar power.

Beyond its own vehicles, though, Tesla is looking to lead on a broader scale of manufacturing and sooner than may have been expected, beginning work on “designing the machine that makes the machine” as they start on factory machines that claim to be first-version-ready in 2018.

Autonomous Automobiles

With Tesla leading the way on the vehicle side of affordable electric, as well as enhancing the means of manufacturing, the vision of a nation of Tesla drivers is not so farfetched. Except, that is, for the fact that Tesla doesn’t plan for you to be driving the car.

As a leader in the development of autonomous vehicles, Tesla’s goal is to put a car on the road with a self-driving capability that is ten times safer than a human driver. And more than just driving itself, the car will be summonable at the touch of a button and, when not in use, can be added to the shared Tesla fleet to earn you money.

The importance of the fleet is multi-faceted. Aside from earning you extra cash, when your car links into it your vehicle will, in a sense, be improving itself. As the larger the Tesla fleet grows, the more data the company will have to improve between-car awareness and other fleet AI technology.

Image courtesy of Tesla

Image courtesy of Tesla

Additionally, outside of the customer-owned fleet, Musk has asserted that Tesla will operate its own fleet in cities where demand exceeds the availability of customer-owned cars, meaning that there should always be a Tesla available to take you where you want.
There have already been suggestions as to Tesla aiming to compete with Uber using its autonomous vehicles, and the idea certainly seems to fit with the emerging vision of a Tesla future. However, it is important to take note that this is still very much a future concern.

The recent death of a Tesla test-pilot is indicative that there is still plenty of work to be done with the technology. Yet we must also take into account that the wide-reaching approach is not a typical ‘business’ move, but instead an extension of Elon Musk’s apparent desire to save the world.

It is unfortunate that, as of now, saving the world consists of ‘beta-testing’ potentially dangerous technology with average consumers. While it is easy to be blinded by the potential of the autonomous car, it is important to remember that it’s failings in arguably simple areas resulted in a man’s death.

And, as pointed out by the director of the Ethics + Emerging Sciences group Dr Patrick Lin in an article for IEEE Spectrum, these are failings that the average consumer is likely to be susceptible to. “Over-trust and inattention are known problems that technology developers need to design for, and simply telling customers not to do what comes naturally is probably not enough” he said. “It’s as if Tesla said, ‘Don’t ever blink,’ and customers promised not to: they just don’t understand what they’re signing up for.”

Ozymandias complex

There’s something more than a little comic book about Elon Musk. His plans practically scream “I want to save the world”. He was the partial basis for Robert Downey Jr’s portrayal of Iron Man. And he has the money, intellect and world-spanning plans of a super villain.

While his aims are certainly impressive and almost indubitably for the good of the world, it’s hard not to wonder if that kind of concentrated power is a good thing

There is no doubt that this is a man that wants to change the world and, more importantly, a man who has the capability to. His success however, could see control over our energy and driving needs placed largely in the hands of one man. While his aims are certainly impressive and almost indubitably for the good of the world, it’s hard not to wonder if that kind of concentrated power is a good thing.

It is not to say he is a man without rivals. Fisker was supposedly birthed from designs originally intended for Tesla’s Model S. Other big-name manufacturers are also getting into Tesla’s market, whether with hybrids or pure-electrics.

Autonomy, too, isn’t a project unique to the Tesla vehicles as everyone from Google to Mercedes has a stake in the technology.

SolarCity, meanwhile, certainly isn’t the only solar company out there, even if it may be one of the biggest. Both in the US and abroad, there are companies nipping at its heels. Furthermore, rivals aside, it is entirely possible that Musk’s companies will implode long before their rivals get a chance at them.

As pointed out by a CNN Money article: “SolarCity’s net loss grew to $250m in the second quarter from $156m in the same period a year earlier, the company announced in its earnings report ‒ before talking up the solar roofs. Likewise, Tesla revealed last week that its losses for the second quarter ballooned to $150m, more than twice what Wall Street had expected”.

However, assume the businesses hold out. Assume that their plans pay off and that the hybrid of Tesla/SolarCity becomes the largest in the clean energy field. The Elon Musk future then is one in which entire communities, perhaps cities, are running off SolarCity panels and Tesla Powerwalls.

A future in which the roads swarm with a fleet of autonomous Tesla cars, earning money for their owners during the day and available to provide a lift at the touch of a button. The hyperloop train carries passengers from Los Angeles to San Francisco in just 35 minutes.

factor-archive-28These are cities that hum with electricity, all of it off-grid and cleanly generated. And all of it, ultimately, is in the hands of one man. It is a brilliant future. It may well be one to fear. For one company to have so much influence is an idea worthy of concern. But a future where Tesla fails may well be an even worse one.

Only 6% of space enthusiasts would like to live in the first low-Earth orbit settlements

A new survey has found that only 6% of respondents would be happy to live in a proposed Equatorial Low Earth Orbit (ELEO) settlement, where humans live in a small cruise ship-like space station at a similar orbit to the ISS.

Four conditions were set for respondents to assess and while at least 30% said they agree with at least one of them, the number shrank significantly when it came to those who could accept all the conditions.

These were that the settlement itself would require permanent residence, would be no bigger than a large cruise ship, would contain no more than 500 people and would require residents to be willing to devote at least 75% of their wealth to move in.

The example settlement used in the survey is Kalpana Two, pictured, a conceptual cylindrical space habitat visualised by Brian Versteeg. Measuring 110 m x 110m it would rotate to provide simulated gravity on the “ground” and zero-gravity near the cylinder’s core where occupants can ‘fly’, and would be capable of housing 500 – 1,000 people

The study, conducted by researchers from San Jose State University (SJSU) and the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) sought to assess the desirability of such a settlement. Previous similar studies had suggested early space settlements would need to be significantly smaller than believed, and located far closer to Earth.

The research was conducted via an Internet survey made available to the public between 8 January 2016 and 17 June 2016. The survey, using Qualtrics software, received 1,075 responses and was distributed via an email list, social media and spac- related organisations. It should therefore be noted that the respondents are not representative of the general population: 95% actually identified as space enthusiasts.

“95% of respondents were self-described space enthusiasts and 81% were male. 70% were from North America and 20% from Europe,” the study authors Al Globus, from SJSU, and Tom Marotta, from AST, wrote in the research paper.

“This is not surprising as the authors made no attempt to select a random sample of any particular group, but rather to simply distribute the survey as widely as we could.”

Kalpana Two, the conceptual space station the survey was based on. Images courtesy of Brian Versteeg

The paper itself is rather enthusiastic about the 6% figure, pointing out that while it is a low percentage of those who responded, if considering it 6% of those who globally identify as “space enthusiasts” there are likely more than enough to fill these early settlements.  The authors also acknowledge that such a number is not all that surprising given the demands of the move.

However, while the enthusiasm and optimism is laudable, it’s worth noting that those principally willing to give up the most were small in number and tended to fall on the wealthier spectrum. So while the possibility of the project exists, it seems that, as with all commercial space projects so far, it would principally have to cater to the rich.

Moreover, when responding to the main attraction of life in space, “the most common remark was simply that it was ‘in space’ not any particular characteristic of living in space”. There seems in the responses to be a certain enthusiasm that may not hold up in the actual moment of decision.

The fact that people like the idea of living in space is no surprise; the survey however does little to assuage the realities of the situation. Enthusiasm is promising, however the main result of this survey seems to be that blind optimism is only truly backed up by vast amounts of money.

Life expectancy to break the 90-year barrier by 2030

New research has revealed that the average life expectancy is set to increase in many countries by 2030 and, in South Korea specifically, will improve so much as to exceed an average of 90 years. The study analysed long-term data on mortality and longevity trends to predict how life expectancy will change from now until 2030.

The study was led by scientists from Imperial College London in collaboration with the World Health Organization. Looking at 35 industrialised nations, the team highlighted South Korea as a peak for life expectancy; predicting expectancy from birth, they estimate that a baby girl born in South Korea in 2030 will expect to live 90.8 years, while men are expected to live to be 84.1 years.

Scientists once thought an average life expectancy of over 90 was impossible, according to Professor Majid Ezzati, lead researcher from the School of Public Health at Imperial College London:

“We repeatedly hear that improvements in human longevity are about to come to an end. Many people used to believe that 90 years is the upper limit for life expectancy, but this research suggests we will break the 90-year barrier,” he said.

“I don’t believe we’re anywhere near the upper limit of life expectancy -if there even is one.”

South Korea leads in life expectancy. Image courtesy of jedydjah. Featured image courtesy of Carey and Kacey Jordan

Ezzati explained that the high expectancy for South Korean lives was likely due to a number of factors including good nutrition in childhood, low blood pressure, low levels of smoking, good access to healthcare, and uptake of new medical knowledge and technologies. It is likely that, by 2030, South Korea will have the highest life expectancy in the world.

Elsewhere, French women and Swiss men are predicted to lead expectancies in Europe, with 88.6 years and nearly 84 years respectively. The UK is expected to average 85.3 years for women (21st in the table of countries studied) and 82.5 years for men (14th in the table).

The study included both high-income countries and emerging economies. Among the high-income countries, the US was found to have the lowest predicted life expectancy at birth. Averaging similar to Croatia and Mexico, the researchers suggested this was due to a number of factors including a lack of universal healthcare, as well as the highest child and maternal mortality rate, homicide rate and obesity among high-income countries.

A lack of universal healthcare is one of the reasons the US trails behind in life expectancy. Image courtesy of HSeverson

Notably, the research also suggests that the life expectancy gap between men and women is closing and that a large factor in increasing expectancy is due in no small part to older sections of the population living longer than before.

Such increased longevity is not without issue, however, as countries may not be prepared to support an ageing population.

“The fact that we will continue to live longer means we need to think about strengthening the health and social care systems to support an ageing population with multiple health needs,” added Ezzati.

“This is the opposite of what is being done in the era of austerity. We also need to think about whether current pension systems will support us, or if we need to consider working into later life.”