U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-24-2014, 10:44 AM
 
7,281 posts, read 8,833,971 times
Reputation: 11419

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by dartanian View Post
The taxation on vehicle should be related to their actual emission. Maybe putting a tax on gasoline can aid emission reduction.
The problem with that is the failure to account for the very high pollution emissions used to produce EVs. While EVs don't emit tailpipe emissions, they are among the most costly in terms of pollution to manufacture and dispose of.

Taxing only vehicle with tail pipe emissions gives EV drivers a free ride and indeed, considering that they get tax credits for buying them, those that can afford $80k-$100k electric cars are being paid to buy them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-24-2014, 11:54 AM
 
Location: Volcano
12,971 posts, read 23,539,229 times
Reputation: 10573
Quote:
Originally Posted by EllenMarie215 View Post
And if people know they'll fail emissions testing, and can't afford to fix it, then you'll see the same kind of graft and BS you saw in New Orleans with brake tags. They asked me did I run into the building when I pulled up. I said no, paid him and he handed me the tag. Luckily, my brakes were ok. Had it been emissions? Well, I can see the temptation to hand the "inspector" an extra 20 to keep my car on the road so I could survive until I came up with the $ to fix the exhaust- which you can't do if you can't work.
That's easy to prevent if the state government is actually committed to enforcement. There are a variety of technical solutions various states use to inhibit cheating. I don't remember all the details now, but I had a mechanic years ago who had a whole bag of tricks to get a car through a smog check... I remember he had a spray bottle of some kind of potion he'd spray into the air intake just before the dynanometer run for one kind of problem. But after several years of watching him "doctor" one beater after another to give them another year's new lease on life, he suddenly stopped all that when the state put in cameras in the inspection bays.

Quote:
Short of buying people new cars, or relocating them, the only thing that would work would be the gas tax, although I personally think life's hard enough.
Life is hard, yes, but as a society we have to be a little hardnosed about enforcement of certain laws. If a car can't pass a simple brake check, then it's a danger to others, and should be sidelined until and unless it can be repaired, period. I mean as in, quarantine the car until it is fixed. Don't even allow it to be driven home.

A car that can't pass a smog check isn't such a clear and present danger to people's lives, but it needs a practical limit on the leeway allowed, with teeth, such as requiring the problem to be fixed within thirty days or the car can't legally be driven until it is fixed.

Hawai'i requires an annual safety check that includes the usual brakes and lights and mirrors check, but also checks for illegally dark window tinting and overwide tires that project outside the body. These are absurdly easy for a mechanic to overlook, and there were various scams around the required liability insurance, so the state institutes a new program in which the mechanic records the inspection electronically on a tablet instead of a paper form, and it includes a realtime check for valid insurance, and pictures of the wheels and the tintometer reading, etc. End of problem.

Driving a car isn't a right, it's a privilege, and if an owner allows a car to fall into such a state of disrepair that it no longer can pass inspection, then it should be taken off the road.

As a point of perspective, in the horse and buggy era, there were inspectors who looked for draft and carriage horses which were too sick or too old to be working any more, and could order them put down if necessary. They still do that check in New York City with the Central Park carriage horses, and it must really suck if you make your living there as a hack driver and the city inspector says old Seabiscuit is over the hill and lifts her license. But, you know, life is hard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2014, 12:24 PM
 
Location: Volcano
12,971 posts, read 23,539,229 times
Reputation: 10573
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mack Knife View Post
The problem with that is the failure to account for the very high pollution emissions used to produce EVs. While EVs don't emit tailpipe emissions, they are among the most costly in terms of pollution to manufacture and dispose of.
No, Lycos just proved otherwise. Once EVs get past the 62K mile marker, approximately, they surpass ICE vehicles. And since their useful lifetime may well prove to be double the length of gas buggies, their total net gain can be enormous.

As for construction of the vehicle itself, EVs use the same material in the same proportions for the chassis and body and interior, so there's no appreciable difference. The EV motor and wiring and control use more copper, which is highly recyclable. For LiON batteries, the prime failure point is the cathode and anode, which break down over time, but new technology out of Stanford U promises a major reduction in that issue, giving the batteries more power and much longer life. For existing batteries the contents of the cells can be recycled, as Tesla/Panasonic plan to do at their new Nevada factory.

Quote:
Taxing only vehicle with tail pipe emissions gives EV drivers a free ride and indeed, considering that they get tax credits for buying them, those that can afford $80k-$100k electric cars are being paid to buy them.
And the $22K EVs, and the $28K EVs and the $33K EVs, etc. It has been deemed in the country's best interests to increase the use of EVs, and to increase the use of clean, renewable fuels, so using tax credits as incentives to promote these fledgling enterprises until they reach a high enough acceptance level to stand on their own is not only an entirely appropriate activity for our government, but it's something they've been doing for the entire life of our country. Such diverse activities as building canals and railroads to running ferries to providing electrical service to remote areas to buying planes to fly the mail and much more have been incented by the government when free market forces were insufficient to get a desired change made.

The incentives on ZEVs won't last forever, but by the time they expire there should be sufficient momentum, and enough competition and innovation to allow them to succeed entirely on their own merits.

After all, that is the whole idea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2014, 12:58 PM
 
3,759 posts, read 3,483,626 times
Reputation: 8926
A pollution tax is inherently unfair. Suppose you buy an 18 mpg Ford Expedition and put 8,000 miles a year on it (444 gallons). Suppose I buy a 45 mpg Toyota hybrid and put 30,000 miles a year on it (666 gallons). Who's burning more gasoline and putting more pollutants into the atmosphere?

People will do what works best for them financially. Someone (such as myself) who puts a lot of miles on his car is going to naturally gravitate toward a car that's more affordable to operate. My Prius V is quite economical to operate, and I hyper-mile like crazy and can usually get 49-50 mpg, but I also put a lot of miles on it (28,000 in a year and a half). A soccer mom/dad with a huge gas guzzler SUV who pretty much drives the kids to school and the mall and puts less than 10,000 on the car is definitely not in the big polluter category.

I agree with others who say, let the technology solve the problems. Eventually, we'll all be driving 60mpg gasoline or diesels, or else 500-mile range Teslas and similar EV's that recharge very quickly. I can't wait for that marvelous technology to come down the pike. I suspect everyone else feels the same. A well appointed, powerful car that gets 60 mpg, 0-60 in 3 seconds, and goes 600-700 miles on a tank is a driver's dream.

New taxes are not needed. We need to be thinking up ways to get rid of the existing taxes as it is, and not adding even more. Make it cheaper for people to live, drive to work, and raise a family, and we'll all be healthier and happier.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2014, 02:22 PM
 
7,281 posts, read 8,833,971 times
Reputation: 11419
The basic formulations for gasoline haven't changed in quite a while. Next year we will not see a major change in how gasoline is formulated. You can buy a car made in the 1980s and just go fill it up and drive it.

EV technology isn't stable yet and won't be for a long time. If battery technology changes, so much for how long it takes an EV to catch up to a gasoline fueled car when it comes to pollution caused to manufacture and operate it. Changing the battery out for a new version isn't cheap and few people will do it. The car goes to the scrap heap.

There aren't going to be standard EV batteries because each manufacturer designs their cars they way they want. Tesla tried to establish standards by semi offering patents to other manufacturers. The problem is that no one really wants them because they aren't falling for the trap of giving up their own ideas on innovating in favor of sitting still and using someone else's handme down technology.

EVs are getting a free ride and they shouldn't.

The leader in EV range still can only provide a little over a 100 miles of endurance when driven as most people drive. Turn on the A/C or heater, drive at night, have more than 1 person in the car, use the radio, navigation and play a DVD for kids or something and that EV isn't going to cut it.

The 200+ miles ranges being touted are in a perfect world and if the world was perfect, EVs wouldn't be part of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top