HOV Enforcement

Yeah, but then the housing developers will just chop them down to make room for more townhouses which will add more commuters to the road which means more trees, more chopping, more commuter, etc ..

On a more serious note, while I do care about the environment and believe that we all have to do our part (turn off lights, turn down the HVAC and turn on the ceiling fan, etc), the one and ONLY reason I pick up slugs in my Northstar V8 Cadillac is purely to cut down on my time to and from the office. I pickemupandbringemhome when it is convienient for me and to cut down on my commute.

Selfish? Absolutely! ... and that is the one and only reason the system works as well as it does ...

The Green Party, Al Gore, NoSUV, the Sierra Club, and Earth First! can all kiss my tail pipe, but no matter the politics, if they are standing in line when I pull up and call out 2 for X, Y, or Z location ... they are welcome to hop in and enjoy the ride.



FKA Atlantis.99

quote:

---

Originally posted by jomac006

NOSUV, I like how you brought up only a single flaw in my argument. Once you reach 65 sure the car may run off both engines but to get up to 65 you have to floor it and it takes a while for a Hybrid to get up to 65, so you are using a lot of gas just to do that. Second I like how you ignored the fact that the engine is a toxic also if you don't allow 3 people cars into the HOV lane how crowded the streets are going to be, and don't tell me that Hybrid drivers with carpool or pick up slugs. I saw 6 Priuses on the road this morning and all 6 had only the driver in them. No matter what you say 2 SUVs with 3 people in each is better for the environment then 6 Hybrids with only the driver in them. So take your Holier than Thou attitude somewhere else, because those of us slugging are reducing our carbon footprint a lot more than you and those who drive only themselves to work in their hybrids.

---

You are still wrong. Check the pollution figures. SUVs need to be HOV-8 to make up for a SOV hybrid. As most informed people can tell you, the hybrid exemption is NOT for fuel eficiency. It's not a Holy than Thou attitude - it's merely the facts. You are NOT reducing your carbon footprint unless you are on a bus or in a hybrid.

RVDUSA and jomac006, both of you have basic flaws in your discussion.

RV - you have overlooked several economic issues, chiefly supply and demand. Back when the express lanes were for buses only (hybrids did not exist), 40% of the cars were taken off of the road. What would happen if all slugs "went back" to taking the bus? And the alterative, using a hybrid for the "hybrid only lanes," would mean that ALL miles used by that vehicle, not just those for the commute, would use less gas and pollute less.

jomac - it's too bad that you are ignorant on how a hybrid works, and that you are either using a gut feel or getting your information from sources that also have no idea. Unless you floor the accelerator the entire time, the battery provides assistance to the internal combustion engine. It's rarely if ever only one or the other -- that's why they call it a hybrid.

In a 23 OCT post by NOSUV (the troll to some) he submits that by changing the HOV from High Occupancy Vehicle to Hybrid Only Vehicles the region would see a 30% air quality improvement and obtain a significant drop on gasoline demand. I find this statement categorically flawed.

My experience indicates that Hybrid only cars in the HOV lane "typically" has only one driver and no passengers. So to make the HOV lanes Hybrid Only would simply increase the number of cars on the road and conversely reduce the number of riders per car. This would mean that there are now two hybrids on the road to what would otherwise be two riders under the current system. This would certainly negate the air quality issue noted by Mr. SUV and increase per capita consumption rates by 33% which is 66% cumulatively in a Hybrid only system.

Of note in this analysis is the fact that China stands out as a developing country that is also seeking to increase per capita consumption rates. China as you know has the world’s fastest growing economy, and there are 1.3 billion Chinese, four times the United States population. I think Mr. SUV that you recognize that the world is already running out of resources, and it will do so even sooner if China achieves American-level consumption rates. Already, China is competing with us for oil and metals on world markets.

Recognizing that per capita consumption rates in China are still about 11 times below ours, I offer for your consideration the possibility that China's consumption rates will rise to our levels in the very near future. In this scenario also imagine that nothing else occurs to increase overall world consumption — that is, no other country increases its consumption, all national populations (including China’s) remain unchanged; and immigration ceases. Given these facts China’s growth is roughly doubling the world’s consumption rates. At this rate Oil consumption will increase by 106 percent, for instance, and world metal consumption by 94 percent.

Therefore to propose a Hybrid only lane only serves to increase our own consumption rates by 66%. With China and you increasing per capita consumption rates by such astronomical proportions my only recourse is to submit that - if we were to change the HOV to Hybrid only we risk a strategic confrontation with China for natural resources.

Now do we really want to risk war with China for a Hybrid only lane? [:D]

quote:

---

Originally posted by NoSUV

ain't free speech a wonderful thing, until you don't like the views being stated? - Ceejay2

---

Interesting quote at the bottom of you post - I guess you think that only applies to you?

---

Couldn't the same be said for you too, dearie?

quote:

---

It's been often quoted, and the Wash Post 11/10 article also states it, that the term "slug" for this region came about because drivers were stealing passengers that were planning on taking the bus.

Show me where it says "steal". Please. Someone choosing a carpool over an over-priced, slow as molasses bus isn't stealing, merely exercising their rights in a free market economy.

You know what free speech does exclude though are libel and defamation of character. You putting it in writing, especially repeatedly, that slugs are theives, stealing, etc, is just that.