“I’m not sure how much further Luobo Kuaipao — Baidu’s fully autonomous robotaxi, known in English as Apollo Go — can really take off here,” said Li Mo, a taxi driver in Wuhan, Hubei Province. “A lot of people make their living driving taxis. It’s how many of us support our families. Tourists like you might be able to try it out for the experience, but fully replacing human drivers? I don’t think the system will ever allow that.”
Although Chinese telecommunications and automobile corporations are fervently developing and promoting technology while shouting for ‘the popularization of autonomous driving’, there are still indications that it is far from completely replacing human drivers. A look at the ongoing ‘bowl argument’ between Baidu’s Luo Bo Kuai Pao and the taxi industry shows that the market acceptance has yet to increase for national expansion. Additionally, there are many areas that require technological improvement, and issues regarding high expenses and insufficient legal grounding need to be resolved. It will be interesting to see how China overcomes these obstacles.
◇ The commercialization of autonomous driving, market acceptance is still low… Taxi industry complains of ‘job loss’
On the 26th and 27th of last month, in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. It is referred to as the largest autonomous driving city in China, possessing a 3,000 square kilometer (about 9 billion pyeong) autonomous driving pilot zone, which is five times the size of Seoul (approximately 600 km²). Baidu is reportedly operating over 400 units of Luo Bo Kuai Pao in Wuhan alone. Taxi drivers met here stated, ‘I often see Luo Bo Kuai Pao’ and collectively expressed concerns or dissatisfaction.
The taxi industry is greatly concerned about the ‘ecological destruction’ caused by Luo Bo Kuai Pao. Wuhan taxi driver Wang Mo noted, ‘The base fare of Didi (China’s ride-sharing service) is 13 yuan (approximately 2,600 won) and that of Luo Bo Kuai Pao is 15 yuan (approximately 3,000 won), making Didi cheaper,’ and added, ‘However, Luo Bo Kuai Pao is offering discounts of more than 50% to expand its market share, making it impossible to compete.’ When the reporter personally rode in a Luo Bo Kuai Pao, discounts were received ranging from as low as 60% to as high as 70%, depending on the distance.
The taxi industry’s complaints include not only a decrease in passengers due to Luo Bo Kuai Pao but also a threat to their jobs. In theory, robo-taxis like Luo Bo Kuai Pao could dramatically cut down on labor costs, which constitute most of operational expenses, and control vehicles precisely to improve energy efficiency. Furthermore, robo-taxis do not require rest. Elon Musk, the founder of Tesla, had predicted that the operating costs of robo-taxis could be less than $1 (approximately 1,500 won) per kilometer.
Recently, due to an economic downturn, taxi usage rates in China are gradually decreasing. Local media reports say that in some small taxi companies in cities, dozens of vehicles have ceased operations. In this context, the expansion of robo-taxis inevitably presents the greatest threat to them. Wuhan taxi driver Dai Mo remarked, ‘Currently, there are only a few hundred Luo Bo Kuai Pao, but if that number increases, our jobs will undoubtedly be affected.’ This provides context for why they continuously voice opposition to regulatory relaxations.
◇ Robo-taxis deemed ‘culprits of traffic congestion’… Technological stability declines and regulations are inadequate
Chinese telecommunications and automobile corporations maintain that the ‘era of popularizing autonomous driving’ is not far off, but local responses indicate that much remains to be done on the technological front. Wuhan taxi drivers advise, ‘Do not take Luo Bo Kuai Pao during rush hours.’ Taxi driver Wang stated, ‘Sometimes, I see Luo Bo Kuai Pao completely stationary in the middle of the road,’ saying that it seems to be judging that a safe distance has not been sufficiently established, and this causes traffic congestion.
Another taxi driver, Li, expressed that ‘while a human can easily pass through a signal that is clear, Luo Bo Kuai Pao is too slow and overly conservative, resulting in it not getting through,’ stating, ‘There have been many times when it has been frustrating.’ Taxi driver Chen mentioned, ‘I’ve heard that it’s not easy to ride when it’s raining heavily,’ noting that in reality, the autonomous driving sensors are regarded to be vulnerable in inclement weather.
To resolve these issues, large-scale research and development (R&D) investments need to be continuously made, yet the current situation makes it difficult to generate profits solely from the autonomous driving industry. Although Baidu has successfully developed the sixth generation of Luo Bo Kuai Pao, which is over 50% cheaper than existing models, it has not yet reached the break-even point. While Baidu, along with China’s largest electric vehicle company BYD and the largest telecommunications corporation Huawei, are currently passionate about investment, the lack of accompanying profits makes sustainability challenging. According to the Chinese financial news outlet PingWest, ‘Entrepreneurs in the autonomous driving sector are facing many challenges,’ stating, ‘R&D investment needs to be of a tremendous scale, making it difficult to achieve short-term profitability.’
There are also indications that many aspects of the legal system, including regulations, need refinement. A typical example framing the most significant hurdle for the dissemination of autonomous driving is the definition of responsibility in the event of an accident. Beijing has implemented a ‘Beijing Autonomous Vehicle Ordinance’ since the 1st of this month to provide legal grounds for ‘level 3’ and above autonomous vehicles that do not require driver intervention except in emergencies. However, this ordinance only addressed the investigation and handling processes of accidents. Meng Xin, from the Beijing Junze Law Office, stated, ‘While China is taking the lead in setting precedents for level 3 latency rates, it is necessary to clarify the distribution of responsibility in accidents.’