Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The author of "Driverless Cars Are Coming" did a pretty good job of weighing out the positives and negatives of driverless cars. He seemed to be leaning towards the development of driverless cars. My position is very similar to the author's. Driverless cars could be very useful in the near future.

While compiling a list of pros and cons, it can be seen that the ratio of the two are about one to one. The first positive of driverless cars is the fact that no one will have to spend the money to buy a car anymore. The text states, "...a future with a public transportation system where fleets of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system." If this public-transport system was to occurr, no one would have to spend the ridiculous amount of money it takes to buy a car. These people could put the money they saved from not buying a car towards other expenses. Over a person's lifetime, they would be more likely to spend less money on the taxi fees than they would on buying a car and putting gas in it. The overall expense of gas in a person's driving lifetime adds up to hefty amounts.

The topic of gasoline is talked about world wide. Countries are producing it and using it just as quickly. Soon, the world will be dried up of all it's oil and we will have to resort to other means of power for our cars. One way we could slow down the consumption of gasoline is by developing driverless cars. If a public-transport system is set up, less people will have cars to fill up with gas, therefore less oil is being used annually. The text states, "The cars...would use half the fuel of today's taxis..." If the United States made the switch to driverless cars, we would only use about half of the oil we use today. This would not only be good in the sense of saving precious fossil fuels, but also in the sense of saving the environment. More people would use the public-transport system meaning there would be less cars on the road. This would reduce the amount of carbon emmissions and help save the environment.

If the mass public-transport system would come into existance, how would it be any different than the public-transport systems we have today? Most people who use public-transport ride a bus. Busses stick to schedules and will not change according to a specific person's schedule. This can pose many issues for people. If driverless cars were used as a form of public-transport, there would be more flexibility in schedules. A driverless car service would function almost identically to a taxi service, but as stated earlier, would be more environmentally friendly. The text states, "The cars...offer far more flexibility than a bus." Many people forsee populations becoming more environentally friendly and hopping on board with the driverless car idea.

With the positives of driverless cars, there are also some negatives. With these "driverless cars," the human driver still has to be alert in order to take over in certain traffic conditions. The text states, "In fact, none of the cars developed so far are completely driverless. They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." Why call them driverless cars if they aren't entirely driverless? Even though human drivers occasionally have to put in small amounts of work, the car does most of the work. The text states, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves..." After that, what all is left to do? The car just needs a little assistance every now and then.

Everyone has formed different opinions on whether or not driverless cars should be used widespread. After weighing out the pros and cons, it seems like the positive aspects out-weigh the negative ones. If driverless cars were more widely used, we would see improvement in the environment, less fossil fuels being used, and less money being put towards cars and being put towards other expenses.

Score: 5