Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

If we really want to take climate protection seriously in the future, then we need a consistent allocation of the generated climate damage to the polluter (there are several options, e.g. CO2 pricing).

Transport: More public transport (in the short term, the long procedures, e.g. for railway lines, are quite a challenge) Less individual transport (which can no longer be continuously promoted in the long run)

Construction: New construction will become significantly more expensive if energy and resource consumption are consistently allocated to the polluter.

Energy: Nuclear power and coal are no longer competitive when climate damage is consistently allocated. Storage on the grid is no longer double taxed (how stupid is that actually?)

This affects everyone, some much more than others, but it is still cheaper than a "business as usual" approach - only that then we do not pay, but our children - not only in the form of money, but also in terms of security and peace.

It is also clear that this is anything but easy to implement in a global environment with a growth-dependent economic system and provokes resistance.

If you know that you have to jump 4 meters to overcome an abyss and you will die if you don't jump, you don't plan a 2.3-meter jump. You can argue excellently about the jumping technique, but not about the distance, that is fixed.

Maybe everything looks insanely expensive now - if politically effective action is taken, building will have to become much more expensive. In 10 years, people will consider today's new construction costs a bargain in relation to an income.

It was already written above: Especially in rural areas, charging an electric car costs me almost nothing for 10 months. This more than compensates for the elimination of the flat rate.
And don't come at me with "Nobody can afford electric cars!!!11". Anyone who thinks gasoline cars are cheaper can go ahead. Anyone capable of full cost accounting will already be surprised how cheap driving a car can be. Even without photovoltaics.

The whole thing looks different if you do not own the autonomous car but use it.

I live near the Polish border and transport traffic on Berlin highways is enormous. Why can't this be shifted to the rails?

Can you explain to me why it costs almost nothing? :)

I can't think of anything, absolutely nothing, that is cheaper to rent with regular use than to own it yourself.

But the rented autonomous vehicle has the same problem, it makes an empty trip between me and the next customer.

I can think of many examples, such as a cooperative machinery ring in agriculture. And: Just wait - ownership will become really expensive when resources are scarce.

With good data analysis and control, the distance to the next customer is minimized. Compare this with parcel services. Imagine that a person is a parcel that sometimes has a short-term (express), sometimes a regular and planned destination. Would you assign each parcel/person its own vehicle or build logistics if you were to plan such a system? We like it as it is now – I even like cars. But there is no doubt that this is totally inefficient in terms of total costs and resource intensity.