Vertical taxis are already a ‘technological solution’ for making urban life more sustainable in our near future, but are they really a solution?
Cities have a vertical dimension. They have evolved upwards since the early 1900s, when New York City acquired its iconic skyline and skyscrapers became material symbols of growth and modernity across the West. Cities are now getting a new verticality: “flying taxis”.
It is the realization of a dream from some 110 years ago, when urban planners envisioned cities in which ‘bee-like planes could soar from terrace to terrace’. As an engineer fantasized:
“When this result is achieved, the appearance of our cities will change, because every terrace will become a stopping place for these air cars. We will be able to settle on terrace after terrace and soar at will (1910, p364)».
Stephen Fitzpatrick, director of Vertical Aerospace, the British manufacturer of EVTOLS vehicles, claims its “new products and services will improve the lives of everyone in the UK. And for the whole planet.
The flying taxi is billed as “a futuristic mode of transport that could potentially revolutionize the way we get around”, promising to reduce traffic congestion and bring us closer to zero-emission transport, making it possible to travel from “existing airports.” , locations nationwide and new bases in the city center.
But before investing in them, it seems sensible to have a debate about whether they are really a solution to climate change, a revolution, and whether they offer unique opportunities for the future, as they tell us.
The prospect of a noiseless flight seems better than the current noise pollution from cars. But, as many have argued, the production of electric vehicles and the flying taxis that are about to land in our lives require raw materials like lithium, which are finite.
The label “zero emissions” only applies because it refers to “operational emissions”: the impact of production is shifted elsewhere, while flying taxis continue to contribute to climate change and the destruction of ecosystems and indigenous peoples. Like a cigarette inhaled in the UK and exhaled in Bolivia, where journalist Cédric Gerbehaye has documented the ‘white gold rush’ and its consequences.
Common responses to this criticism are, “You have to start somewhere!” and “Lithium batteries are a temporary solution, a patch waiting for hydrogen fuels.”
These arguments are very powerful because they succeed in downplaying the specific set of environmental problems that a technology creates in the present, rather than the belief that the technology can solve things in the future. Therefore, ‘climate change’ is not a convincing argument against helicopters, as they have been presented as a solution to ‘climate change’ itself.
The vertical taxi is an example of an environmental problem – climate change – that has turned into a technological problem (how can technology ‘solve’ it). This rationale can be seen in the language of the company Vertical, which states that “decarbonising transportation is essential to the future of our planet and that is why Vertical is proud to transform mobility.”
The effects of the vertical helicopter on our behavior and consumption are really uncertain. Research in Paris has shown that freed up road space leads to the mobilization of rides “that would not take place if the roads were blocked”. So “urban traffic congestion tends to maintain a self-limiting equilibrium.” We may have more traffic than before. This means that, with more free space, the vertical, we will travel and move more. As Michael Barnard has written, “lift-off taxis are a solution in search of a problem.”
This technology will bring other problems and uncertainties. Technology is political, as science policy researchers Ian Scoones and Andy Stirling argue: “These debates too often ignore larger political questions about which direction technological innovation should take, what the implications are, the associated uncertainty, who wins and who wins.” who loses, etc.». Who has the ability to redefine collective identity through technology? How does that affect the lives of those who can’t decide which technology to use?
Geoff Boeing, professor of urban planning at the University of Southern California, describes vertical flight as an urban segregation technology: “If you can pay, you can queue.” We also need to think about nature: will cities lose the sound of birds? Will migration patterns change?
Productivity and employment have long been the legitimacy factors of technological development. “Innovation” creates jobs and stimulates economic growth because it increases efficiency and productivity.
Vertical then justifies itself by saying that the helicopter can solve the UK’s economic ‘problems’: ‘Devon and Cornwall are far behind the rest of the UK in productivity’.
Degrowth’s proponents argue that increased productivity is not the only key to human well-being. They assume that a broader questioning of the concept of time, production and well-being is essential. If you start to rethink these values, you can accept different forms of mobility. It seems that Devonians and Cornwalls are the happiest in the UK. Do you want to be ‘fixed’? In any case, it does not follow from this that the generated power is distributed fairly.
There is no evidence that economic growth can be decoupled from climate impact in an absolute sense. This argument has been firmly ‘debunked’. So the broader impact of the vertical taxi may negate the benefits it brings from “emissions” [operativa] zero”. It is essentially still a form of production, which comes with global supply networks, new markets and, as a result, an increase in consumption in general. So we have to ask, what is the more global impact of do these work?
With regard to this issue, it is very important to consider that the helicopter will generate technological expectations on a global scale. Fitzpatrick knows: “The lessons learned and the successes in Britain will become the roadmap for the whole world.” This technology creates a model for the mobility that ‘modern’ and ‘green’ cities should have. It creates a very limited picture of technological development and of the ‘future’ itself.
The general manager of ENAIRE, a Spanish listed company that will manage the flights of the first aerotaxis demonstrations in Spain, scheduled for 2022 in Barcelona and Santiago de Compostela, says:
«ENAIRE, as a public entity of the Ministry of Transport, Mobility and Urban Agenda, is ready to take its responsibility and generate an incentive and facilitation effect for private sector companies or interested public authorities, so that Spain can position itself among the leaders in the development and exploitation of this new sector.
Some see ‘the future’ as a place full of electric helicopters. Good. Others believe that this is just one possible version of the future; we need, as Scoones and Stirling write, ‘multiple modernities’ and plural definitions of ‘progress’. The consequences of having one influential model are clear: Governments feel compelled to “catch up” by adopting certain ways of life. If not, they may be looking back.
Vertical Taxi in Santiago de Compostela
In some cases, it leads to adopting “solutions” in places where it doesn’t make sense from an ecological and social point of view. Santiago de Compostela is a medieval city that you can walk to most places. But the Xunta de Galicia is funding a vertical taxi initiative, so “the capital of Galicia will be one of the locations where the first tests of this system will take place.” Will we all have to “evolve” towards a vertical city model promoted as “green” and “modern” so as not to be stigmatized for living in dirty and “backward” cities? How will this affect the direction of government funding?
There are proven methods, transport and forms of urban organization that reduce CO2 emissions and change behavior (as demonstrated in Paris and Pontevedra with the 15-minute city, for example). These solutions do not have to privatize the air or harm the environment.
As Pontevedra shows, changes in future mobility require the support of governments, which also influence the type of technological development in our cities and societies. Governments will have to decide whether to invest money in public transport or finance private companies. It is necessary to discuss the options and point out other possibilities.
Which means of transport and technologies do we want as a society? What does ‘progress’ mean to us? Is it a vertical taxi or is it a city connected to its surroundings by trains, which are greener than cars, and cycle paths and magic carpets, so that the movement of bicycles generates electricity to power streetlights, shops and filter the water ?
This article was published in ‘The conversation
Source: La Verdad
I’m Wayne Wickman, a professional journalist and author for Today Times Live. My specialty is covering global news and current events, offering readers a unique perspective on the world’s most pressing issues. I’m passionate about storytelling and helping people stay informed on the goings-on of our planet.
