WWF Artifact

My name is Jackson R. Blankenship and this is my rhetorical analysis of an advertisement for the World Wildlife Foundation that focuses on the over-fishing of the world’s oceans. This was one of three ads in a campaign that all focused on destroying important ecosystems.

Overfishing is a growing issue that is continuously taking over the world’s oceans. When businesses exploit the world’s natural resources without actively trying to restore that which they are taking away, not only does it harm the ecosystem itself, but it also negatively effects the business from an economic standpoint. If there are no fish to be caught, then the company has no way to make revenue. The world Wildlife Foundation works to both raise awareness and fight back against issues like these that threaten valuable ecosystems. Their global efforts to restore and protect the life on earth can be seen best through their extensive articles, merchandise, and advertisements.

This advertisement in particular got my attention the moment that I saw it. As someone who cares deeply about the ocean and all of its life, I feel that I fully understand the message that this image is trying to get across to the viewer. This image might look simple and desolate, but that is the entire point of the advertisement; to show an empty ocean and bring awareness to the fact that it could theoretically be our future if major corporations do not stop their overfishing practices. This simple advertisement may not be the most engaging visually, but it carries a significant message that can be easily understood through minor analysis of each element incorporated into the picture.

The first thing that the viewer sees when they look at this image is the shark fin; a sure sign of terror. This is the focal point of this advertisement. It draws the eye to that particular part of the image in order to get a reaction from the viewer. Since the focal point of this specific ad is something with connections that aren’t very positive, it is clear that this is not a happy or fun message. I think that this focal point is very interesting because it doesn’t look like a conventional focal point. It isn’t brightly colored or bold in any fashion and it doesn’t exactly jump off the page at the viewer. In fact, it’s sort of dull and insignificant. However, despite all of these qualities, it draws the eye towards the image.

At first glance, this image might not look like much. This could make the viewer think that it isn’t an effective advertisement. However, when you think about the image, the text, and the message behind the ad, you can easily make sense of the message. In this advertisement, the viewer can see two different images of the same ocean, one with a shark fin in the water and one that appears to be empty. The page layout of this image is effective because it places contradicting images together. The first image with the shark fin has signs of life, creating a more active or moving environment. The second image, however, has nothing going on. All we can see if still waters in an open ocean. This desolate depiction of a lifeless ocean gives a gloomy or melancholy tone to the image. When the two images are placed side-by-side, it shows opposing views of the same situation. In this case, the empty photo represents the future results of society’s effect on the oceans. When the first photo is considered in the interpretation of the second, it makes the viewer see the consequences of their actions much better than just having a picture of an empty ocean. When you take away all of the signs of life from the image, it has a stronger impact on the viewer because they can actually see what they are causing.

In this ad series, the WWF chose to feature animals that aren’t exactly cute and cuddly.  They we can see a shark fin sticking out of a calm ocean. For decades, the media has painted sharks as murderous, blood-thirsty, hunting machines that terrorize the ocean looking for swimmers and surfers to turn into a snack. And the World Wildlife Foundation is playing right along with this stereotype and using it to their advantage. Humans are not a part of a shark’s natural diet and most shark attacks against humans only happen because the shark was provoked. Essentially, sharks are not a natural predator to humans, but since they are depicted as such, one might label them as “horrifying.”

In the second picture, we see a calm and empty ocean. For the purposes of the advertisement, it is best assumed that there is no life in the water shown in the image. This picture show an ocean that was caused by overfishing. This image works well in the context of the ad because it makes the viewer feel guilty for taking away the ocean wildlife. The emotions that are brought forth from viewing the image create a stronger connection between the message and the audience. Most people do not have any direct connections to overfishing, but almost everyone has an impact on the environment, usually through simple pollution.

The text below the images shows the pathos element of the advertisement because it implies emotion. The “horrifying” and “more horrifying” instill a mild sense of fear in the viewer that makes the viewer feel as if bad things are happening in the ocean because of their own actions. When emotional aspects are brought into an advertisement, the ad usually has a stronger impact on the audience. In this case, that emotion is not happiness or sadness, it is fear for the future of aquatic wildlife. An advertisement can have a strong emotional impact without being uplifting or sentimental and I believe that this WWF ad does a fantastic job at showing that.

There is also a logical aspect to this advertisement. At the bottom of the image, “exploiting the ecosystem also threatens human lives” is written in small letters. It is easy to overlook, but it is incredibly important because it exactly writes out the message of the advertisement. This doesn’t have to be an eye-catching piece of text to be effective because it gets the point across. It is a firm statement that can easily be interpreted and understood. The text is explaining that by tearing apart the oceans and draining them of all valuable resources, the human race is ultimately hurting itself just as much as the wildlife. People may think that fishing is a good thing because it creates a food source and initiates a market to bring income, but this isn’t entirely true. This is where the ethos aspect of the advertisement comes into play. Fishing is only good up to a certain point because if you are not doing it sustainably, or rather ethically, it can create a log of ecological and environmental problems. Overfishing is incredibly dangerous because it can wipe out large populations and even entire species of wildlife that are critical in an aquatic ecosystem. On a different note, fishing industries can ultimately harm themselves by overfishing. If there are no fish to be caught, then there are no fish to be sold, and the business cannot survive.

If I were to change anything about this advertisement, I would try and make it more about all types of aquatic ecosystems rather than just about the ecosystems found in the world’s oceans. Overfishing and pollution can happen in any environment where a profitable fish population lives, so the issue of can affect freshwater species as well. I would also consider taking the ad from an above water perspective to an underwater perspective. Instead of having a view of the shark above the surface, I would want to show the life below and create a livelier scene full of fish of all different kinds. In the second half of the advertisement, I would want to feature an empty ocean with little to no active wildlife and possibly a fishing boat on the surface of the water. The majority of the World Wildlife Foundation’s advertisements or images are kept relatively simple because the main goal of the foundation is to show direct evidence of a situation rather than create a dramatized version for the media. They show real images, of real people, ecosystems, and wildlife, to raise awareness and fight against the real issues in the world today.

Overall, I think that this is an effective advertisement because it sends a strong, easy to understand message to an audience that gets the viewer thinking. The page layout, image-choice, and text all create an advertisement that can be interpreted in a multitude of ways depending on the audience. For example, if a big corporation saw this ad, they might slow down their fishing practices for a while to let the fish population recover. Alternatively, if the average person saw this, they might try and make more eco-friendly choices to keep pollution out of the oceans and waterways. No matter who you are or where you come from, you have an effect on the well-being of the world’s aquatic ecosystems and this advertisement sends that message loud and clear.

Works Cited

“WWF: Shark.” RSS, Ads of the World, 1 June 2010, https://www.adsoftheworld.com/media/print/wwf_shark_0. Accessed 17 November 2021.

Benson, Maggy Hunter. “5 Reasons to Revere, Not Fear, the Shark.” 5 Reasons to Revere, Not Fear, the Shark, Smithsonian Ocean, 14 May 2018, https://ocean.si.edu/ocean-life/sharks-rays/5-reasons-revere-not-fear-shark. Accessed 18 November 2021.

Test

This is a test page

Rhetorical analysis is a way of understanding and interpreting “texts” by examining the components of their construction. For this essay, you will choose an image or a commercial to analyze, considering its rhetorical situation and how the different elements of the image work together to try to make its audience do, think, or feel something. Your goal is to construct a thesis based on your interpretation of the image, using specific aspects of the “text” to support your conclusions.

We live in visually-dominant society. Most of the texts we consume are visual in nature, and much of what we read is accompanied by images. These images are rarely neutral, and often contain implicit arguments connected to specific cultural contexts.

Homepod- Welcome home
Types of visual analysis

ssssssss

How Uber is Taking an Opposite Approach on Advertising

Please enjoy my artifact for the Visual Analysis project for ENGL 1105. This video was created by Uber during the pandemic. Find it here

How Uber is Taking the Opposite Approach on Advertising

In the time of covid, Uber truly learned how to promote a business by saying not to use it. With evidence to back ethos, logos, and pathos and attract a crowd they were successful in keeping their business afloat through a rough time worldwide. 

Uber Logo

Uber is a rideshare service in which you request a car through an app and ride in a driver’s car, similar to a taxi. Their mission statement states, “We reimagine the way the world moves for the better.” In their reimagining, they hope to make a connection between technology and transportation. According to their mission statement, movement is at the core of their mission and they hope to modernize the transportation system.  In their mission, they also hope to make riding safe and sustainable. On the topic of sustainability, Uber plans to be completely electric with no emission vehicles by 2040 making their company a zero-emission company by that time. “It is our responsibility as the largest mobility platform in the world to more aggressively tackle the challenge of climate change,” said the Uber Sustainability Pledge. With this mindset, they plan on making an initiative to have many drivers in EVs (Electric Vehicles) by 2025. On the other side of their mission, Uber hopes to make riding safe in any way possible. In these efforts, they state that information is kept completely confidential and RideCheck, Uber’s special service to provide peace of mind while in one of their vehicles, is available 24/7. With safety as one of the companies top priorities, it is not a surprise that  Uber made its safety efforts evident during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Advertisement by Uber

At the beginning of the Coronavirus, Uber made these ideas known by releasing a commercial named “Thank You for Not Riding.” In this 75 second commercial, Uber shows many home videos on how people are spending the pandemic. It opens with a simple piano backtrack which plays on the idea of pathos by giving the audience a sense of calm as it is played alongside a video of a sunrise. It then starts to show how families are connecting with one another in a time in which relationships are some of the only things we can rely on. This advert for the rideshare service also made sure that it had enough diversity throughout the ad to make it so everyone has someone to relate to. It also made sure to show different ways of connecting with family as throughout the covid-19 pandemic many families were having to find unconventional ways to contact each other as they were not able to see each other in person. 

They were able to show things from families waving out windows at each other to getting on phone calls and being very emotional with each other two families who are getting to bond because they’re stuck together. This touched on pathos as it was able to make the audience connect with these people that they probably have never met because we have similar experiences.  The final shot of the advertisement says the most about Ubers Mission in the ad as it tells everyone to stay home for those who cant. This message touches all of those who are close with a first responder or frontline worker who are risking their lives so that we can all remain safe and healthy in a time in which it seems hard to do so. Using messages like these, they yet again play on their successful use of pathos, but this time also hint to logos as it is logical what they are asking. Through methods like these they are able to connect with a very broad audience worldwide as many of these efforts were similar to those seeking meaningful relationships either romantically, familiar, or platonically. 

Although the company did lose money on the ridesharing service during the first quarter after the commencement of covid, they doubled profit with their food delivery service known as ‘UberEats.’ This helps to prove that this advertisement was successful in its mission, keep people out of Uber’s rides during the pandemic. It also shows that using the methods of pathos and logos, Uber has proven that even if your company is not what’s needed in the world at the moment, you can still grow your company by helping the world understand what is needed at the moment. I believe this is why the Covid themed Uber advertisement about not using their company was one that had an impact during the pandemic. 

BBC. “Coronavirus: Uber Customer Activity Falls Sharply.” BBC News, BBC, 6 Aug. 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53687422.

Committed to Helping – Uber United States. https://www.uber.com/us/en/coronavirus/.

“Explore the Uber Platform | Uber United States.” Uber, https://www.uber.com/.

Kansal, Sachin. “Ridecheck: Connecting You with Help When You Need It.” Uber Newsroom, 16 Sept. 2019, https://www.uber.com/newsroom/ridecheck/.

“Mother and Son on Patio .” UBER, https://www.google.com/search?q=thanks+for+not+riding+with+uber&sxsrf=AOaemvKzOddnF1uEQSvAYuTPh2OvKaewYw:1637332063874&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiPh6-g0aT0AhVAgXIEHYYcAQQQ_AUoAnoECAEQBA&biw=1792&bih=1009&dpr=2#imgrc=8nlbat4WkSXnIM.

“Online Wine Night.” Uber, https://www.google.com/search?q=thanks+for+not+riding+with+uber&sxsrf=AOaemvKzOddnF1uEQSvAYuTPh2OvKaewYw:1637332063874&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiPh6-g0aT0AhVAgXIEHYYcAQQQ_AUoAnoECAEQBA&biw=1792&bih=1009&dpr=2#imgrc=BOSRl2Pa4l0V9M.

“Our Road to Zero Emissions | Uber – Uber United States.” UBER, UBER, https://www.uber.com/us/en/about/sustainability/.

“Safety | Uber.” Uber, 2021, https://www.uber.com/us/en/safety/.

“UBER Logo.” Uber, http://www.uber.com.

UberWorldwide. “Thank You for Not Riding | Uber.” YouTube, UBER, 8 Apr. 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_e8XLnMiCOE.“Youtube Video Cover.” Uber, https://www.google.com/search?q=thanks+for+not+riding+with+uber&sxsrf=AOaemvKzOddnF1uEQSvAYuTPh2OvKaewYw:1637332063874&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiPh6-g0aT0AhVAgXIEHYYcAQQQ_AUoAnoECAEQBA&biw=1792&bih=1009&dpr=2#imgrc=Yal-NhXpynbBAM.

Electric Cars are better than Normal Cars

Many people today assume that electric cars are a recent invention. It may come as a surprise to learn that the first electric vehicles were invented in the mid 19th century and held the record for highest vehicular land speed up to around 1900. However, the production and use of electric cars declined over the years due to their high production costs, short battery lives, and low top speeds. The interest in electric cars is slowly gaining prominence again in recent years mostly due to the environmental concerns raised by the substantial use of hydrocarbon fueled vehicles. Governments are shifting their focus, and electric cars are being more and better known as years go by and are also owned by a few people. It is time to recognize electric cars as the next generation of cars as it is not only better for the long run but currently better and safer than regular cars. The factors and features that make the electric car better than regular cars and why electric vehicles should be owned are now going to be discussed.

A reason why electric cars should replace hydrocarbon fueled cars is their consideration for the environment. Although it cannot be said that electric vehicles do not pollute the environment completely, they cause way less pollution than regular cars. According to studies already done by several environmental protection agencies, car emissions will be rapidly reduced overall if more people were to start using electric vehicles than normal cars (Dimitropoulos 2016). An electric vehicle produces zero direct emissions. Even plug in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), which have electric motors as well as gasoline engines, still produce much fewer emissions when they are using gasoline because they have been proven to be more efficient than conventional vehicles.

Unlike conventional vehicles that use non renewable energy sources, electric vehicles energy source is renewable. This is because electric cars use electricity and modern technologies. According to Gelmanova (2018), an electric car user just needs to connect to an electricity grid and recharge when they run out of fuel. A typical electric vehicle uses almost 0.2 kilowatt hours of electricity for every kilometer covered. A fully charged electric car can move continuously for between 6-8 hours before it needs to be recharged (Gelmanova 2018). Of course, these vehicles might be expensive to buy but they have been proven to cost less in electricity charges than normal cars cost on gas and fuel. Currently, global warming is a huge concern. Fuels products have been said to contribute the most in global warming as they produce a high percentage of carbon dioxide and methane to the atmosphere which are responsible for global warming (Dimitropoulos 2016). With the introduction of electric cars there is good news that global warming is likely to have a declining trend. This is because electric cars consume low levels of fuels so it minimizes pollution by alot .  

In terms of safety, electric cars have been tested and found to be much safer than regular cars. In the event that a regular car crashes its likely to catch fire more quickly than an electric car found in the same situation (Helmers 2017). This is because regular cars run on gasoline, a highly flammable chemical fuel. Currently,  regular cars hold the record of the most fatal accidents which have ended a large number of lives. Although the manufacture and supply of electric cars is low, it is worth knowing that the security of electric cars is not comparable to fuel cars. Moreover, an electric car needs way less mechanical components to run than a normal car since the manufacturing relies heavily on modern technology. This means that electric cars are less likely to get damaged, wear and tear, and the vehicles internal infrastructure uses less space. Most of the accidents occur due to wear and tear which rarely happens to electric cars. According to Gelmanova (2018), the engines of electric cars is highly efficient indicating low petroleum consumption. In case an accident occurs, it is not likely to be as bad compared to regular cars. Electric cars are more comfortable and secure than regular cars.

Electric cars also have a financial advantage over regular cars. Even though they are more expensive to buy than regular fueled cars, electric cars are cheaper to use and maintain in the long run. After purchasing electric cars, the maintenance costs are very low compared to fuel cars. The fact that wear and tear occurs slowly indicates that car to be cost efficient. Comparisons have revealed that the amount of money used to buy electricity used for charging an electric vehicle is about a third as much used to buy petrol for the same vehicle, per km (Herman2019). This makes electric cars more price friendly in long run. Furthermore, electric cars have fewer moving parts than regular cars, which make their maintenance easier and cheaper as they require less mechanical servicing. Buying  electric cars will fix the economy of multiple countries all around the world.

However, the idea of introducing electric cars into the motor vehicle industry has been criticized along the way. One group that is against this development said that the battery range of an electric car is extremely limited, stating that the current best range for an electric vehicle is the 85kWh battery Model S. the point here is that the efficiency of electric cars are compromised. But developers can guarantee that this limitation will not be around for long. Models are already being developed and tested that can allow driving for more than 200 miles before the need for a recharge. There is improvement but the batteries under development are smaller than expected, about the size of a laptop.

Another argument against electric cars is that a lot of time is required to recharge an electric car. It is said that most Americans have not yet gotten the idea of buying electric cars because they are afraid that recharging the vehicles will take up a lot of their time (Rus 2019). There is no electronic device that can charge instantly, not even the smallest most simple mobile phone. People all over the world who care about the environment might have to pay that price for some time. But that shouldn’t be a reason to worry. A lot of funds have been invested in battery technology research especially in decreasing charging times and increasing storage capacities. Recently big developments has been made that made a realization on improving lithium ion battery structure to gain charging speeds over twenty times faster than the current ones.

Probably the most known idea of electric cars is that they are too expensive. Many buyers complain that they cost way too much. However, the available data and information to support this argument is inconsistent. A year ago, the cheapest new electric car was going for 24,000 dollars. Today, the most affordable electric vehicle that could hold a family goes for roughly 30,000 dollars, which is lower than the average price of a new conventional car going for an average of 32,000 dollars (Wilberforce 2017). With these prices it is clear that the average American can afford an electric vehicle. Also, an electric car will cost one more than a regular car would in the long run. The concept is the same as building a new house and renting one.

Lastly, the most pointless argument against electric cars is that they are just as bad to the environment as regular cars. electric cars doubters often bring it up when all their other arguments have been backfired and countered. The case is based on a survey done at North Carolina State University, claiming that electric cars and hybrids would not reduce America’s air polluting emissions even if the cars made up 42% of all passenger cars in the States. But the survey was disapproved by a similar case by the Union of Concerned Scientists, which gave reliable counter argument results.

In conclusion, the electric car industry has realized recently that it is not only highly appreciated, but also highly required to the increasing cases of environmental issues. As written in this paper, the advantages of electric vehicles heavily outweigh the interests brought up by the critics of the industry. The large adoption of electric vehicles is linked to cost, since the price of gas and gasoline powered vehicles is assumed lower and both are available. But, as shown in this paper, improvements in technology are rapidly increasing and hopefully, the use of electric cars will soon take charge over regular vehicles. As is shown in this study, we believe that throughout the following decade mechanical progression and strategy changes will help indicate the progress from fuel controlled cars. Furthermore, the achievement and success of this depends on the international population of people and it is important that people will feel enhanced and active to drive an electric vehicle. Every person can have any kind of effect and make a change, so let us all go out and make a difference.

The Future of Self-Driving Vehicles

To the eye of the public, self driving cars are the future for the automobile industry. The majority of the public looks for the new and improved technology that releases every year, ranging from smartphones to computers, and all the way up to cars. Many people may not realize how much technology is actually in a current car and how much it can affect a drivers experience. It often seems like people forget how helpful the little things are when driving, such as motorized chairs, seat warmers, lane assist and cruise control. When looking at improving technology in cars, there are many small tweaks that can be made to improve the overall comfort and quality, but introducing and improving a self driving mechanic can create a much larger impact on how people use transportation. A self driving feature on cars allows for the driver to relax and not have to worry about keeping focus on the road and everything that is going on, meaning that they will end up having more energy throughout the day. Also, many vehicles that implement the self driving mechanic also tend to make their self driving vehicles electric, allowing for either lower or no gas costs and emissions. Self driving cars also tend to allow for reduced traffic as they are more efficient and less likely to cause a traffic jam by completing an action of cutting someone off or getting into an accident. Electric self driving vehicles have been seen as a method to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, reduce stress of drivers, and prevent accidents.

Driving can be a very tedious task, having to constantly be on the lookout for other cars, signals and the potential animal or child running out into the road. It is difficult for people to sit down and drive a vehicle for more than a few hours at a time without getting some form of tunnel vision, which runs a higher risk of accidents, but also can have a large impact on the drivers stress and productivity levels. When a young teenager starts to drive for the first time, there is always that terribly nervous parent sitting in the passenger seat, fearing for their lives as their child begins to drive for the first time. That fear continues even after years of experience, because in the back of every drivers mind is the thought of how one wrong move can become fatal. This thought is the reason why driving can be as tedious as it is, it requires constant focus and attention, which can be difficult for a nine to five businessman who is constantly working and may even be lacking sleep. This is where self driving vehicles can make a huge difference. Studies show that it takes an average of 25 minutes for a person to drive to and from work each day, and if that driver could spend those 50 minutes each day responding to emails, phone calls, or just catching up on their beauty sleep, they would be much more productive. In an article by Stephanie Braun, it is mentioned that companies across the U.S lose a large amount of money each year due to sleep deprivation in their employees. “Sleep deprivation is a productivity nightmare. A study from RAND Europe found that poor sleep costs the U.S workforce $411 billion dollars annually” (Braun). If every employee at a certain corporation used a self driving vehicle when going to and from work, they would save millions as their employees would be able to spend the time in the car either catching up on sleep or work, rather than stressing and using energy for driving through traffic. This overall energy boost during the workday for employees is great for companies, but there is also a public image that can be seen from companies that use self driving vehicles.

Almost every self driving vehicle on the market today is either fully electric or a hybrid, meaning that they use little to no gasoline. In today’s political environment with the global warming crisis, electric vehicles are seen in a very positive light as they help reduce the carbon footprint being left. This can be encouraging for businesses and corporations, as they would get very good publicity if they were to use all electric vehicles, especially for large company brands such as BMW and Nissan, both of which have begun the transition into electric vehicles. These electric self driving vehicles allow for these decreased emissions, which can have a very large impact in urban areas such as San Francisco, which suffers greatly from smog, the smoky fog that builds up in the air from tailpipe emissions. In an article written by The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, electric vehicles do still give off some form of greenhouse gasses due to the process of generating electricity, however, the greenhouse gas emissions are far lower than from the burning of gasoline for normal gasoline powered engines (“Reducing Pollution with Electric Vehicles”). The article also mentions how some chemical pollutants are released into the air during the refueling process, which is entirely avoided with electric vehicles as they are simply plugged into an outlet. Many electric self driving vehicle owners also gain the benefits of not having to refuel their car, which saves them money overtime, but also is much more convenient, as they can just plug in their car overnight and have the equivalent of a full tank of gas when they wake up for work in the morning. This convenience of the electric vehicle only adds onto the benefits of the self driving aspect of the vehicle, helping for an overall positive experience while driving.

One of the most worrisome aspects of driving is getting into an accident. Whether the accident is between two cars or a car and an inanimate object, it is still a worry as it can not only be fatal to everyone on the road at the time, but it will also be very costly to fix. When using a self driving vehicle, there is a much lower chance of getting into an accident, and the odds of the self driving vehicle being at fault are almost zero. According to a CNN article by Naomi Thomas, there were a total of 1.35 million deaths worldwide caused strictly from car accidents, and is the leading cause of deaths for humans between the ages of 5 and 29 years old (Thomas). This is an extremely high number, which can be dropped greatly if self driving cars were on the roads. This is due to the fact that humans make mistakes, they can fall asleep at the wheel, get distracted by their phones, or just get straight up tunnel vision and get into an accident. Self driving cars on the other hand don’t make the same mistakes as humans, as they are always able to sense everything that is happening around them and process the movement of other cars and objects to predict what will happen much faster than a human could. Statistics from an article on Forbes.com shows that, of the 1.5 million deaths worldwide per year due to car accidents, 76% were caused due to either drunk driving, speeding, or distracted driving (Eliot). These statistics prove that 76% of accidents were human caused and could be avoided with the use of self driving vehicles. A benefit of the reduced amount of accidents on the road would include a reduction in traffic jams. Many traffic jams are caused by either accidents or are set off by a small action such as a driver slamming on their brakes suddenly, which snowballs into a larger traffic backup. Since self driving vehicles are able to plan ahead and avoid both those accidents and the sudden slowdowns, they can greatly reduce the amount of traffic on the roads at a time, allowing for people to get to where they need to go much sooner, increasing productivity overall. 

While the self driving vehicle category has many benefits, there still tends to be issues. For example, one of the largest issues with the statement of electric self driving vehicles being better for the environment is that, while yes electric vehicles do not use gasoline, they still require electricity, which often comes from the burning of fossil fuels. However, while a lot of electricity does come from burning fossil fuels, which gives off the same amount of greenhouse gasses as combustion engine cars do, the amount of electricity that comes from the burning of fossil fuels is much greater than the amount of energy a standard combustion engine car gets from burning gasoline. Also, depending on where the driver lives in the world, a large amount of the electricity could be from renewable energy sources such as solar panels or wind turbines. An article written on the topic of electric vehicles states, “The major factor determining the scale of the impact from electric vehicles is the carbon intensity of a country’s electrical grid. The more carbon intensive the grid (primarily due to the burning of coal), the less effective EVs will be at reducing carbon emissions” (Barkenbus). Along with the fact that electric self driving vehicles are not 100% efficient, they are also always blamed when an accident occurs. When it comes to car accidents, there is always finger pointing between the two drivers on who is at fault, the problem with self driving cars is that they don’t have fingers to point. If an accident occurs with a self driving vehicle, the opposing driver will always have the excuse of the computer failing or messing up, making it more difficult for the public to get behind the idea of self driving vehicles. These car accident issues arise the worries of the public, it makes them think about if they would be willing to put their life in the hands of a computer.

Electric self driving vehicles are seen as the potential future of the automobile industry. The self driving feature, while not 100% perfected, still outputs almost no fatal accidents compared to the millions of deaths per year from human induced car accidents. The self driving feature also comes with great benefits towards the driver. From increased sleep to increased overall productivity, the self driving feature gives both drivers and employers a great reason to encourage the growth of self driving vehicles. Besides the potential of a greatly increased revenue due to the increase in productivity, many self driving vehicles are electric, adding an extra benefit to their use plus a great image from an external view. While there are possible issues and fears that come with electric self driving vehicles, that does not deny the fact that they  are seen as a method to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, reduce stress of drivers, and prevent accidents.

Works Cited

Barkenbus, Jack. “Electric Vehicles: Climate Saviors, or Not?” Issues in Science and Technology, 13 Feb. 2017, issues.org/electric-vehicles-climate-saviors-or-not/.

Braun, Stephanie. “The Key to Better Workplace Productivity May Be the Self-Driving Car.” Ladders, 27 July 2018, http://www.theladders.com/career-advice/the-key-to-better-workplace-productivity-may-be-self-driving-cars.

Eliot, Lance. “Essential Stats For Justifying And Comparing Self-Driving Cars To Humans At The Wheel.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 30 May 2019, http://www.forbes.com/sites/lanceeliot/2019/05/30/essential-stats-for-justifying-and-comparing-self-driving-cars-to-humans-at-the-wheel/#4b5ae87b46ed.

“Reducing Pollution with Electric Vehicles.” Energy.gov, http://www.energy.gov/eere/electricvehicles/reducing-pollution-electric-vehicles.

Thomas, Naomi. “Traffic Accidents Are Eighth Leading Cause of Death Globally, According to WHO.” CNN, Cable News Network, 7 Dec. 2018, http://www.cnn.com/2018/12/07/health/who-road-safety-report-intl/index.html.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started