[JayCT]

Originally Posted by WouldLoveTo

I didn't say vehicles are less efficient.

But there are more vehicles on the road, and sales of SUVs and trucks are much higher than they were when gas prices were higher.

Even though they are more efficient than 20 years ago, for the most part, SUVs and trucks get worse milage than cars.

So is there an actual source for "gas tax giving us less money", or was that just an assumption based on more fuel efficiency?

Sorry, I know that but the post you responded to referenced gas usage which is tied to fuel efficiency. Just trying to expand on what you said in response to Stepford’s comment. . Jay

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by BPt111

There no money for Barunum station

https://www.ctpost.com/local/article...d-12477394.php

Interesting—does this mean the federal TIGER grant gets taken back or does it still come if the state has money to put in on this?

[WouldLoveTo]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Sorry, I know that but the post you responded to referenced gas usage which is tied to fuel efficiency. Just trying to expand on what you said in response to Stepford’s comment. . Jay

I don't think I worded my response right either. I thought maybe there was a "study" put out by the state to argue for higher gas taxes.

In the last 10 years, total gallons sold to retailers have increased by about 1000 gallons/day. I don't know how that adjusts for inflation, but seeing as the gas tax is a fixed amount (therefore not tied into the actual price per gallon), the state *is* getting more money than they did 10 years ago anyway (though presumably not as much as they'd want)

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by WouldLoveTo

I don't think I worded my response right either. I thought maybe there was a "study" put out by the state to argue for higher gas taxes.

In the last 10 years, total gallons sold to retailers have increased by about 1000 gallons/day. I don't know how that adjusts for inflation, but seeing as the gas tax is a fixed amount (therefore not tied into the actual price per gallon), the state *is* getting more money than they did 10 years ago anyway (though presumably not as much as they'd want)

You are correct that the gas tax is a fixed amount per gallon but over a 20 year period the amount that tax can buy has decreased significantly. Take a $1 million project back in 1999. It would cost more than $1.5 million today according to an inflation calculator. Another way to look at it is that if the state gets $100 million per year, they could do 100 $1 million projects with it back in 1999. Today they could only do 66 projects. Big difference. Jay

[BPt111]

Waiting for I-95 fourth lane and improvements


Waterbury Gets Third Lane, Widening I-84

[WouldLoveTo]

Originally Posted by JayCT

You are correct that the gas tax is a fixed amount per gallon but over a 20 year period the amount that tax can buy has decreased significantly. Take a $1 million project back in 1999. It would cost more than $1.5 million today according to an inflation calculator. Another way to look at it is that if the state gets $100 million per year, they could do 100 $1 million projects with it back in 1999. Today they could only do 66 projects. Big difference. Jay

Sure but gas sales have gone up, so the state IS getting more money. That was what the chart was for. And it only goes back 10 years, so I'm betting sales were even lower 20 years ago.

[GoHuskies]

Originally Posted by WouldLoveTo

Sure but gas sales have gone up, so the state IS getting more money. That was what the chart was for. And it only goes back 10 years, so I'm betting sales were even lower 20 years ago.

Even if car sales are up the states population isn't increasing. Families may have more vehicles per household but the overall number of drivers might not be increasing. Add to this the increased efficiency on new cars also means fewer out of state drivers need to stop for gas while passing through the state.

[BeyondtheHorizon]

Originally Posted by BPt111

Waiting for I-95 fourth lane and improvements


Waterbury Gets Third Lane, Widening I-84

ZERO traffic on a monday morning commute at rush hour on 84 in Waterbury in both directions. It was probably the first time in decades that's happened. Adding a lane worked wonders.

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by BeyondtheHorizon

ZERO traffic on a monday morning commute at rush hour on 84 in Waterbury in both directions. It was probably the first time in decades that's happened. Adding a lane worked wonders.

Today appeared to be a low traffic day in general for whatever reason. Will be interesting to see if it holds.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by BeyondtheHorizon

ZERO traffic on a monday morning commute at rush hour on 84 in Waterbury in both directions. It was probably the first time in decades that's happened. Adding a lane worked wonders.

Good to hear. Years of hard work and construction paying off. Jay