The Self-Driving Dilemma: Safer Roads or More Traffic?

Every year, 1% of all Americans who die are killed in car crashes. If autonomous vehicles could slash that number by 85%, shouldn't we embrace them without question? But what if the same technology increases total vehicle miles traveled by 6%, potentially creating the worst traffic jams in American history?

The Promise vs. The Problem

A new meta-analysis from University of Texas-Arlington researchers puts hard numbers on the autonomous vehicle dilemma that's dividing transportation experts. After reviewing 26 studies on AV traffic impacts, professors Farah Naz and Stephen Mattingly found that widespread adoption of self-driving cars would likely increase total vehicle miles traveled in the US by 5.95%.

That might sound modest, but traffic experts know better. "Literally five extra vehicles at a certain location at a certain point in time could cause a freeway or road segment to fail," Mattingly explains. Traffic congestion doesn't scale linearly—small increases in volume can trigger exponential gridlock.

Meanwhile, a major study of Waymo's performance in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Phoenix found self-driving vehicles were 85% less likely to cause crashes with serious injuries compared to human drivers. Consider this: the US has roughly four times Germany's population, but 14 times more traffic fatalities. Against that backdrop, banning autonomous vehicles might look like a scheme to keep killing people unnecessarily.

The Convenience Trap

Why would AVs increase driving? Simple: they eliminate friction. Who wouldn't want door-to-door transportation where you can scroll social media or read a book, without worrying about insurance premiums or tire replacements?

American history offers a clear precedent. Every time we've made driving easier—from interstate highways to suburban sprawl—we've gotten more of it. And more concrete and asphalt infrastructure to accommodate it.

The increase would be smaller if AVs remain shared (like Waymo's rideshare model) and larger if they become individually owned like today's cars. But either way, the overall trend points toward more vehicle miles traveled.

A Tale of Two Futures

This creates a genuine dilemma for anyone who cares about transportation safety and urban planning. On one side: life-saving technology that could prevent thousands of deaths annually. On the other: the risk of locking America into an even more car-dominated future just when we need to drive less.

The stakes extend beyond convenience. Climate goals, liveable communities, and public health all benefit from reduced car dependency. Even after the electric vehicle transition, fewer vehicle miles traveled means less tire pollution, less infrastructure strain, and more walkable neighborhoods.

Mattingly worries particularly about vulnerable road users. "It's on the pedestrian side and the bicyclist side that I have huge concerns about being able to adequately address those fatalities," he says. AVs excel at avoiding crashes with other vehicles but may struggle more with unpredictable human behavior.

Policy Tools Exist

The good news? We know how to manage this trade-off. Policy mechanisms like congestion pricing, market-rate parking, and road design that naturally slows traffic could harness AV safety benefits while preventing car-dependency lock-in.

The challenge isn't technical—it's political. Will Americans accept policies that make driving more expensive or less convenient, even if they make it safer? The unprecedented convenience of AVs might entrench car culture even deeper, or perhaps their novelty creates an opening for different approaches.

Mattingly sees both opportunity and peril. Unlike the early automobile era, "we really didn't have any idea about the potential negative impacts," he notes. Today, we have hindsight about car-centric development's costs: "oceans and oceans of concrete," social fragmentation, and infrastructure that prioritizes vehicles over people.

The Regulatory Race

Recent legislative proposals to ban driverless cars reflect this tension. Critics argue such bans would perpetuate preventable deaths, while supporters worry about unleashing uncontrolled car dependency.

The window for getting this right may be narrow. AV technology is advancing rapidly, but deployment patterns and regulatory frameworks are still taking shape. The decisions made in the next few years could determine whether autonomous vehicles become tools for safer, more sustainable transportation—or simply faster routes to gridlock.