hybrids get them off HOV
Printed From: Slug-Lines.com
Category: Archived Slugging Topics
Forum Name: Hybrids
Forum Description: This area is devoted to the discussion of hybrid vehicles and their impact to the HOV.
URL: http://www.slug-lines.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1633
Printed Date: 26 Apr 2024 at 8:49pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: hybrids get them off HOV
Posted By: ARX9968
Subject: hybrids get them off HOV
Date Posted: 22 Mar 2005 at 9:41pm
|
either that or be nice enough to pick up slugs.
|
Replies:
Posted By: qorc
Date Posted: 23 Mar 2005 at 7:07am
just as soon as they also eliminate all other forms of transport on the HOV lanes that don't reduce drivers in the regular lanes -
1. Motorcycles
2. Counting children as slugs in cars of 3
3. "off-duty" police
then I would agree
|
Posted By: VA4ver
Date Posted: 23 Mar 2005 at 10:16am
Gorc,
Maybe people should stop counting you. Children are people too. Your selfishness is extreme and maybe when the hybrid exemptions are over, people will add you to the "DO NOT RIDE" list. Grow out of your narrow mindedness.
|
Posted By: qorc
Date Posted: 25 Mar 2005 at 12:21pm
it's not a selfishness. It's a basic prinicple of HOV -
the POINT is to get DRIVERS off the road.
Counting children doesn't help that goal.
I just find the selective outrage over hybrids to be hypocritical.
As for you, moron, I frankly don't care what you think
|
Posted By: VA4ver
Date Posted: 25 Mar 2005 at 3:26pm
As for me being a moron, I'm a hybrid owner who also car pools, so who is the moron now? As for not counting children, well, then we might as well as add morons to the list.
Sometmes my children accompanying me into the city when the schools are closed and go to emergency daycare. Yes, I ride w/o any other drivers. So, am I to look at my children and say, "You don't count as people towards a carpool" and take the regular lanes? Also, the people with family from out of town -- "Oh, grandma, you aren't working so we must take the regular lanes"? See how ridiculous your gripe against "non-working" bodies is?
Yes, carpool lanes are meant for reducing the number of cars from the road. So why aren't you carpooling? Yes, the hybrid envy/hatred is silly -- it's a case of picking out the most obvious and saying "Look, look, this is THE reason why there's added congestion!", instead of looking at the whole picture.
But to dictate how the lanes are used and by whom, makes you just as self-serving as the rest of the narrow minded lot.
|
Posted By: beachhead
Date Posted: 28 Mar 2005 at 5:23pm
|
Maybe we could count children as 1/3 of a person. Hasn't that been done before? Oops, nevermind. Guess that didn't work out to well either.
|
Posted By: nashiggy
Date Posted: 31 Mar 2005 at 6:28am
hybrids suck it was just an auto motive companies way to sucker people out of suv's when a hybrid cost's the same as a 99-2000 expedition or navigator why are you people so blind to the tricks of the trade in advertising.
iggy can help!!!!
|
Posted By: tdar20
Date Posted: 31 Mar 2005 at 9:21am
|
Hybrid technology is here to stay and has great advantages for the future! Its the law thats at issue iggy, the applications for hybrid use range from commercial bus services to the military. You need to read up on the technology a little more. Look at computers.....the cost for a desk top is extremely low in a scant 10 years......imagine that cost curve for hybrid technology and you have a clear advantage. As for the HOV lanes thats another issue that the law makers need to settle quickly!
|
Posted By: tdar20
Date Posted: 31 Mar 2005 at 9:24am
|
Also, what a ridiculous statement that children do not count as occupants in the vehicle. A bit misguided in the interpretation of the HOV use. I think the idea was to maximize the vehicle occupancy.......
|
Posted By: Mr. Bill
Date Posted: 01 Apr 2005 at 9:23am
quote:
Originally posted by qorc
Counting children doesn't help that goal.
Talk about enforcement nightmare! Some people have daycare down town so the kid should then be allowed to be a passenger in that case.
quote:
Originally posted by nashiggy
hybrids suck it was just an auto motive companies way to sucker people out of suv's when a hybrid cost's the same as a 99-2000 expedition or navigator
Lets face it there will be no coming together on this issue. I think that it is a matter of patriotism to use more fuel efficient vehicles. If the country is less dependent on others for our energy the country will be safer--less need to have our boys and girls in harms way. However the hybrids should not have an exemption ... motor cycles yes (I am not a motor cycle owner).
|
Posted By: felixthecat
Date Posted: 01 Apr 2005 at 9:54am
Mr. Bill, I agree with your comment regarding the use of hybrids. I bought mine for various reasons, however one of the mains one being that if in anyway possible I can lessen our dependancy on foreign oil then I am on board with it. I've stated in other posts that if all is said and done and hybrid owners are no longer able to travel HOV as SOV, then so be it. I've ranted enough I guess, but I just wanted to chime in and say it was good to hear someone voice a similar opinion to mine.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 04 Apr 2005 at 9:16am
|
The problem remains on how to reduce the OVERALL congestion. HOV lanes generally have excess capacity, especially compared to the regular lanes. A balancing effort is needed. One way is to allow some of the SOVs into the HOVs, which is what the hybrid exemption does quite nicely. Another way is through the use of tolls, which would allow market forces to achieve the balance by raising/lowering the toll until the desired balance is achieved. Toll could be graduated based on occupancy: $4 base fare, reduced by $2 for each additional passenger. Could make "CF" plates count as an additional person. HOV-3 still ride for free; SOV hybrids pay $2; regular SOVs pay $4. If HOV lanes are too crowded, double the toll. If balance too far the other way, cut the toll in half. Everyone wins.
|
Posted By: qorc
Date Posted: 06 Apr 2005 at 8:27am
it's not ridiculous.
IF the point of HOV IS to take drivers off the road - than any scheme, allowance or exemption that does NOT take drivers of the road should be considered. Why is this hard for some of you to understand?
Current exemptions that do NOT remove drivers from 95
1. Hybrids (obviously)
2. motorcyles (they take up a lane too. Why are they on HOV???)
3. Children (again, this removes no drivers from the road).
why is this so threatening of a discussion? You hypocrites that want the exemption on Hybrids ended, but want to be able to tote your kids to day care in the HOV lanes? Why? For your own convenience - typical "I want everyone else to max out on HOV, but I'll do what's convenient for me" - NIMBY syndrome for the road.
I think it's all up to discussion. If you want to maximize the flow of the road on both sides, you have to minimize the number of drivers. Simple as that.
but some of you are so wrapped up in your own needs (and frankly, I feel sorry for kids being toted downtown for Day Care; maybe some of you should raise your OWN children? but that's another issue), that you get personal whenever someonen challenges you factually.
Flame me if you want, but that only acknowledges that you've no facts to present and you've lost the argument.
|
Posted By: VA4ver
Date Posted: 06 Apr 2005 at 8:53am
Gorc you are obviously a pig headed man. Maybe the MEN out there should provide the the MOTHERS out there so that YES they can raise their children.
Gorc you are the typical "ME" person in DC. YOU flaunt that YOU purchased a Hybrid so that you can travel solo. Well, get your solo rear to the regular lanes and stay off this site.
|
Posted By: qorc
Date Posted: 06 Apr 2005 at 11:10am
got nothing to do with being pig-headed. I have children of my own.
but I find it laughable that you people want EXEMPTIONS from HOV restrictions for children, but not for hybrids or motorcycles. It makes no sense.
Again, if the point of HOV is to (now read carefully and see if you can actually follow the logic) REMOVE DRIVERS FROM THE ROAD THEREBY PROVIDING MORE ROOM FOR EVERYONE, then having children of non-driving age count as slugs makes absolutely no sense.
Why is it so threatening for idiots like you to even discuss it? What is this? The old Soviet Union?
Get a grip.
|
Posted By: VA4ver
Date Posted: 06 Apr 2005 at 1:49pm
There is a huge difference between singling out a car filled by a family unit commuting to work/daycare and a hybrid with one person. First of all the hybrid is just one, but the family unit traveling into work is Father/Mother (2 workers) and child(ren). The biggest threat to the HOV lanes is the solo occupancy vehicle (off duty policeman, motocycle, hybrid, violator). Remember meeting the HOV3 requirement is what counts. We all pay taxes to support this road, so if HOV-3 is met, access can't be denied.
Your argument just isn't valid and the focus should be on strictly the HOT and HOV-1 issues.
|
Posted By: Bob
Date Posted: 06 Apr 2005 at 1:56pm
|
There is another small difference. If we didn't do something about hybrids, we would have an avalanche of hybrids. If we don't do anything about motorcycles, I don't think we will have an avalanche of motorcyles.
|
Posted By: bnvus
Date Posted: 06 Apr 2005 at 2:20pm
Gorc...you are an idiot. How many vehicles do you actually see in the morning with children as passengers? Really. Now count the number of Hybrids. I rest my case.
To the mothers out there who commute their kids into DC it only makes sense. What happens if the kids get sick or hurt? Better to be 10 minutes away versus 45 min-1hr away.
|
Posted By: qorc
Date Posted: 07 Apr 2005 at 7:57am
bnvus
the idiot is you. I see LOTS of them, especially in the evening.
Everyone wants the rules to suit their needs so they can use HOV, I'm only questioning any exemption that does not remove drivers from the road. That IS the point of HOV. Not to "help families commute." Frankly, if these people really cared about their kids, they wouldn't bet toting them to daycare anyway.
Or is that concept too difficult for you to grasp?
|
Posted By: sluDgE
Date Posted: 07 Apr 2005 at 7:35pm
Two honest differences of opinion above. Has anyone looked up how the HOV regulation defines the 3 occupants required for legal HOV use? Does it say specify adults, children over 12 years old, infants, etc? Or is it just occupants. Until this thread, I've never heard about the possibility of any demographic restrictions on the 3 people required to be legal on HOV. Is there? [?]
qorc and VA4ver, have you looked up the regulations to support either of your arguments -- or are you both just content to call each other idiots? [V]
Be nice and,
Keep on sluggin'! [:)]
|
Posted By: qorc
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2005 at 9:15am
well the name calling began with someone else.
as far as the regulations - doesn't matter. I'm suggesting that if the regulations allow non-driver age people to be slugs that this should be changed.
Either the road rules are about removing drivers, or they're not. From what I can see, Motorcycles and children allowed makes no sense and goes against that rule. Same with hybrids and I own one (and the way gas prices are going, I'm damned glad I do!).
All I did was call this absurd rule into question and I got a lot of personal attacks. So be it. Everyone wants HOV for their own convience. I can't say I'm surprised.
|
Posted By: VA4ver
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2005 at 9:17am
... VA4ver, have you looked up the regulations to support either of your arguments -- or are you both just content to call each other idiots? [V]
Be nice and,
Keep on sluggin'! [:)]
FROM DOT WEBSITE:
HOV - Rules & FAQs
Frequently Asked Questions
I'm pregnant. Do I count as one person or two? In the HOV world, you're one person. However, babies of any age count as a person.
People are "selfish" by nature. They do what's best for them and their own. But this isn't about passing judgment on people who opt to use all available means to get to/from work (riding a motorcycle, purchasing a hybrid, carpooling, using daycare provided by their work place and counting their children as a carpool, etc.), it's about the government making up its mind as to how to keep the traffic moving in this region. We can only hope they don't make hasty choices based solely on monetary considerations.
|
Posted By: tdar20
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2005 at 9:33am
Qorc, I dont really care for the name calling but when you make statements like........"Frankly, if these people really cared about their kids, they wouldn't bet toting them to daycare anyway." you open yourself up pretty wide. How do you come up with such an idea with the cost of living these days?? So in families with children one spouse should not work by your logic. In the year 2005 I would hope that we would have gotten past such comments about working families and raising children.
|
Posted By: qorc
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2005 at 11:25am
horsesh*t
I support a family solely on my government income in a house appraised at $625,000. Its not that difficult to do.
Very few people NEED daycare - they just have their own selfish reasons for carting their kids off for 11-13 hours a day to some "center" where they will be raised by an unending series of strangers. Of course, they NEED bigger houses and more things, children be damned.
besides, the name-calling began long before that comment. So get your facts straight.
|
Posted By: VA4ver
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2005 at 11:47am
|
I think Gorc is in league with Uhura. Let him keep is views to himself. He really doesn't have a reality check because he's not considering divorced/single parents in his narrow universe. I motion for no further responses to Gorc's (aka Dorc) posts.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2005 at 11:51am
Good Gravy!! Qorc? Is that you? Didn't we kick your Smug behind out of our community lo these many months ago?
Squeeze your piehole shut and stick your mangy, fly-covered carcass into your high-bred and GO AWAY! The opinions and thoughts of a high-bred owner are self-evidently self-involved, so it comes as no surprise you keep your wife in the basement as a chattel.
How, you knucklehead, could a trooper tell the difference between a child's head and a commuter's head? And what about your head? It is empty, so perhaps it is see-through as well?
Please gaze at your own navel in complacent self-satisfaction on some other board. This one is for the Slugs!
--sigh-- You know, the Sponge has really missed the old give-and-take on the slug board. Such enlightened conversation is seldom found outside the confines of our little world. [;)]
|
Posted By: ScarletLSG
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2005 at 11:53am
Call me CRAZY ... but qorc raises a very valid point. If the purpose of HOV is to REMOVE DRIVERS from the roads, then cars with a driver and two children DO NOT do that. I think THAT is where HOV needs to be clarified. If the sole purpose is to lessen the number of vehicles on the road, then THAT should be the starting point for where the laws should be initiated. As I understand, HOV is NOT for convenience purposes.
Having said all of that, qorc ... your comments regarding working moms are incredibly insensitive. We are a military family, living in military housing and my husband's income DOES NOT allow for me to not work. We don't buy bigger cars, houses, gadgets, etc ... we just don't make alot of money. And believe it or not, my kids are perfectly happy and well-adjusted ... despite their "day-care years."
ScarletLSG
|
Posted By: beachhead
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2005 at 1:21pm
|
Spongy, we missed you while you were away. But your return today has rendered our patience the righteous reward of several smoking diatribes against the usual suspects. Although one of your zingers (to Vettedaddybob, I believe) ventured dangerously close to forbidden political terrain, it was classic just the same.
|
Posted By: tdar20
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2005 at 2:01pm
Brilliant response Q man. I should have expected as much from you. I am glad you have a nice home and can support your family on one income. However thats not always so, especially for those just starting out in life. There was no way I could do that when I first started and I am thankful that we had a great daycare that took wonderful care of my boys while my wife taught and I wandered the world as a Marine 2nd Lt.
You my friend are wound way too tight and may need a few govt holidays to relax a bit!
quote:
Originally posted by qorc
[br]horsesh*t
I support a family solely on my government income in a house appraised at $625,000. Its not that difficult to do.
Very few people NEED daycare - they just have their own selfish reasons for carting their kids off for 11-13 hours a day to some "center" where they will be raised by an unending series of strangers. Of course, they NEED bigger houses and more things, children be damned.
besides, the name-calling began long before that comment. So get your facts straight.
|
Posted By: qorc
Date Posted: 12 Apr 2005 at 8:17am
oh? did I strike a nerve? Some of you feel guilty about day-care? you should.
me, I'd rather raise my own kids. Somehow, I think the fact that they are thriving has something to do with the fact that they are being raised by people who love them and have a stake in their future.
Thus, I have no interest -- nor should society -- in providing a "benefit" to day-care parents by allowing them exemptions from the purpose of HOV.
Insulted? who cares. It's my opinion. You can agree, disagree, whatever. No skin off my nose.
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 12 Apr 2005 at 11:49am
qorc,
While I agree that commuting with kids is silly, three people is three people. There is no exemption in place for them since it's not needed.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2005 at 10:23am
If I had more than two teeth, I'd be gnashing them. Qorc's post of yesterday is something like a high point for him. I don't feel guilty my daughter is in daycare -- she LIKES it. All her friends are there. At home, even in our nice neighborhood, all her friends live streets away -- too far for 8-year-olds to go alone. So at daycare they get to hang out or do crafts or play on the playground or play computer games, or put on plays or study photography or trade Pokemon cards... whatever they want, mostly. She also gets her homework done early and her schoolwork has improved.
We're all glad, sort of, that Qorc's kids are thriving. So are ours. But Qorc's selfish high-bred approach to commuting is clogging the HOV lanes and making everyone else's day longer. Selfish is the Qorc, and to express my Spongy disdain of him, I will no longer address him directly.
As for three riders, expecting him to count past No. 1 is like expecting him to recognize that women may have more to contribute to society than bundt cakes and shiny linoleum.
|
Posted By: Mr. Bill
Date Posted: 15 Apr 2005 at 9:20am
Maybe you do not like qorc has to say but it degenerated after his comment. Now he did call the folks on this list hypocrites so maybe that was a little inflammatory. This could have been an interesting discussion. I have made the point that the reason for the HOV is to get cars off the road, maybe transporting kids does not take cars off the road--but we have a system that is poorly enforced now how will this make it better?
I have read that the HOV was initially added to the Henry G. Shirley Memorial Highway for bus rapid transit (also the designer thought this was a better alternative to a subway--an idea the designer opposed). The carpools were a later addition, so the bus drivers and operators should be on this list arguing against continuing the car exemption [:D]
http://www.roadstothefuture.com/Shirley_Busway.html
|
Posted By: Bob
Date Posted: 15 Apr 2005 at 10:38am
Fact is, it doesn't matter what the HOV was "originally designed for" etc, etc.
If we don't stop the hybrids, we will have an avalanche of hybrids. The motorcycle and child allowances are non-issues and will never affect the amount of vehicles in the HOV.
So the entire argument is moot and is put out there to theoretically make us hypocrites. Nope.
|
Posted By: Mr. Bill
Date Posted: 15 Apr 2005 at 4:29pm
|
I think that the exemption should be lifted (the HOV are HOT lanes if you can afford to replace your vehicle with a hybrid). The goal is to get cars off the road Hybrids do not do that.
|
Posted By: tlschau
Date Posted: 06 May 2005 at 2:30pm
Sponge, I think you need to be careful in the way you are seemingly minimizing a Mom's importance in the family, especially stay at home Moms. "Bundt cakes and shiny linoleum", as you so elegantly put it, are the greatest contributions that a Mom can give to her kids and to society as they are much more valuable to them and their well-being than having 2 BMW's in the driveway.
But back to the discussion regarding counting children in a HOV vehicle. HOV's purpose is to get as many people from point A to point B as efficiently as possible. The last I checked, children are people too. So it doesn't matter if they 8 days old or 101 years old, they are people who are going from point A to point B. Using qorc's logic, nobody without a license should be allowed on HOV. So what about Grandma who doesn't drive? Does she not qualify either? Are we all going to have to tape our licenses to our heads while in HOV so we don't get pulled over? But maybe we shouldn't stop there, just because you have a license doesn't mean that you actually drive a car. So maybe we should be required to have a license AND a car.
|
Posted By: qorc
Date Posted: 09 May 2005 at 9:28am
quote:
Originally posted by tlschau
[br]Sponge, I think you need to be careful in the way you are seemingly minimizing a Mom's importance in the family, especially stay at home Moms. "Bundt cakes and shiny linoleum", as you so elegantly put it, are the greatest contributions that a Mom can give to her kids and to society as they are much more valuable to them and their well-being than having 2 BMW's in the driveway.
----- ---
AMEN!! I'm also amazed by the smug justifications people have for warehousing their kids in daycare, and putting down women/families that raise their own kids.
--------
But back to the discussion regarding counting children in a HOV vehicle. HOV's purpose is to get as many people from point A to point B as efficiently as possible. The last I checked, children are people too. So it doesn't matter if they 8 days old or 101 years old, they are people who are going from point A to point B. Using qorc's logic, nobody without a license should be allowed on HOV. So what about Grandma who doesn't drive? Does she not qualify either? Are we all going to have to tape our licenses to our heads while in HOV so we don't get pulled over? But maybe we shouldn't stop there, just because you have a license doesn't mean that you actually drive a car. So maybe we should be required to have a license AND a car.
-------------
Look, I'm just bringing up a point about "selective outrage" over hybrids. Hybrids are apparently BAD BAD BAD because they only have one person in them and don't take slugs (who are by definition other DRIVERS in almost every case). So it goes back to the PURPOSES of HOV as it was set up - which were TWO (people like to forget the second one) namely, ease congestion AND as a strategy to reduce emissions. Hybrids reduce emissions by having anywhere from 2-4 times the mileage of most vehicles out there.
Yet they don't take drivers off the road. true. But neither does someone driving their car with CHILDREN in it.
I'm not saying this EXEMPTION from the original goals is wrong or not worthy, all I'm saying is that CHILDREN do not provide additional relief to 95 by removing drivers from the road. thus CHILDREN do not create an easier commute on 95 NOR reduce emissions. Thus, neither goal is served.
But if you're going to rag on people with hybrids, rag on other forms of transportation that do not remove drivers from the road INCLUDING the exemption for children, and yes, even motorcycles (last time I checked, they take up a lane too, but yes, they DO serve the second goal of reducing emissions).
Just trying to broad and rationalize the debate. If it was up to me, you'd have to be of DRIVING AGE to be counted in HOV. that would help BOTH sides of the lanes, to be honest.
|
Posted By: VA4ver
Date Posted: 09 May 2005 at 12:44pm
|
You know we all pay the taxes to support the HOV. As long as the rules are followed, who really cares who occupies the car? Next you'll be saying "stay off the road unless you are heading to/from work between the hours of such and such." The only thing that could possibly improve transportation is to improve access to DC (we funnel onto three bridges), keep HOV and no HOT, remove the hybrid/motorcycle/off duty exemptions and improve public transportation. That's all that should be discussed here.
|
Posted By: Wagonman
Date Posted: 09 May 2005 at 1:40pm
quote:
Originally posted by qorc
Hybrids reduce emissions by having anywhere from 2-4 times the mileage of most vehicles out there.
But if you're going to rag on people with hybrids, rag on other forms of transportation that do not remove drivers from the road INCLUDING the exemption for children, and yes, even motorcycles (last time I checked, they take up a lane too, but yes, they DO serve the second goal of reducing emissions).
Your assumption of increased mileage meaning lower pollution is incorrect. The Honda hybrids sold here are dirtier than a lot of other regular cars. The Prius and Escape are cleaner than most other cars sold here(except CNG cars that are much cleaner) but not by a huge margin. In California there are cars sold that are just as clean as the hybrids in every category except CO2 emissions(which aren't regulated yet so don't really count). Its just that California gives hybrids an AT-PZEV rating while normal cars get the PZEV rating. The only difference is some "advanced technology".
I think you were also trying to imply that motorcycles have clean emissions. Generally, they don't. Since they are so few in number they have been ignored, for the most part, by government regulators.
|
Posted By: Paul HOVillegal
Date Posted: 12 May 2005 at 9:55am
Please leave qorc. My head hurts when I read your message.
Paul
|
Posted By: qorc
Date Posted: 12 May 2005 at 11:49am
quote:
Originally posted by Paul HOVillegal
[br]Please leave qorc. My head hurts when I read your message.
Paul
Then don't read them. I don't recall anyone forcing you too.
I guess you have a hard time with dissenting opinions. That's your problem. If you don't have facts, just attack me, eh?
I think I'm bringing up a legitimate issue here. If you don't like it, I'm not going to lose any sleep.
Moron, your bus is leaving. Get on it.
|
Posted By: spring21
Date Posted: 18 Aug 2005 at 5:25pm
How does that idea sound to you? [|)]
http:// - | - | - |
|
Posted By: Lone Wolf
Date Posted: 19 Aug 2005 at 10:03am
Geez, last time I took a look at the overhead sign boards, it did say HOV3 and Motorcylces. 3 people is 3 people, kids or otherwise. Sheesh.
Living and commuting north from Stafford for over 23 years, I cannot tell you how many times I've hollered out to a family (of 3 or more) stewing in a morning or afternoon rush and hinted that they use the HOV lanes. Never occurred to me I would be promoting violation of someone's personal feng shui. Hmmmm.
And as a biker, the arguments to get motorcycles off HOV are specious. Contrary to the suggestion of some, we are more environmentally friendly in that fuel efficiency is maximized and emmisions are fewer. (Seen the '06 and beyond Federal EPA guidelines impacting motorcycle emissions lately? Take a look.) And save the argument that we also occupy a lane. Hardly. As a smaller obstacle in flight, HOV drivers rarely give us the room otherwise granted four wheelers. Certainly, I would like to see the state of Virginia motor vehicle laws changed to allow motorcylists to run two abreast in a lane, and allow for lane-splitting at certain speeds (as is currently allowed in California).
Ride on.
|
Posted By: hexizera
Date Posted: 25 Aug 2005 at 11:29am
|
OK... I've been reading about people complaining about car prices. Prices are determined by demand and supply and unfortunately big cars drive up gas prices. I think that it is a great incentive for people to get hybrids if they can use the HOVs. There is too few of them to actually worsen traffic.
|
Posted By: msericalw
Date Posted: 08 Sep 2005 at 4:20pm
They neede to get the hybrids off the roads. There will be 5 hybrids to one carpool car. HOV still be crowded and so does the main lanes so what is the purpose of carpooling when ther still will be traffic no matter if you carpool or not. I vote hybrids out. Also as soon as they do vote hybrids out they too will be getting in the slug-line trying to get a riders or park there cars and get a ride. So we need to make sure we look at the individuals that are driving these hybrids vehicles and remebering there faces so when they need us for help we say no you wouldn't help us when hybrids was aloud on the road so why now.
elw
|
Posted By: msericalw
Date Posted: 08 Sep 2005 at 4:22pm
Do you know the lines are getting longer and longer and people are waiting longer than usual because the selfish people that are driving the hybrids just roll right pass us when they probably was one of us in the lines? Has anyone thought of that.
MAKE THEM CARPOOL!!!!!!
elw
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 09 Sep 2005 at 10:43am
Actually, the better way is to BAN ALL CARS OTHER THAN HYBRIDS from the express lanes, and make folks take the bus. It's the single best way to improve the overall traffic flow while improving regional gas efficiency and reducing consumption. It also will bring down gas prices not only for autos, but also for home heating - and winter is just around the corner!
Buy the hybrid and quit your moaning - and then pick up some slugs.
|
Posted By: Wagonman
Date Posted: 09 Sep 2005 at 11:05am
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]Actually, the better way is to BAN ALL CARS OTHER THAN HYBRIDS from the express lanes, and make folks take the bus. It's the single best way to improve the overall traffic flow while improving regional gas efficiency and reducing consumption. It also will bring down gas prices not only for autos, but also for home heating - and winter is just around the corner!
Buy the hybrid and quit your moaning - and then pick up some slugs.
Why allow hybrids? Ban them too and make the drivers take the bus. I actually take the bus much more now than I pick up slugs and I have to say the amount of hybrids in the HOV lanes while I'm on the bus is staggering. There are a few that have 2 people in them but I've kept rough count on some rides and about half the vehicles that I see are hybrids.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 09 Sep 2005 at 11:09am
quote:
Originally posted by Wagonman
[br]quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]Actually, the better way is to BAN ALL CARS OTHER THAN HYBRIDS from the express lanes, and make folks take the bus. It's the single best way to improve the overall traffic flow while improving regional gas efficiency and reducing consumption. It also will bring down gas prices not only for autos, but also for home heating - and winter is just around the corner!
Buy the hybrid and quit your moaning - and then pick up some slugs.
Why allow hybrids? Ban them too and make the drivers take the bus. I actually take the bus much more now than I pick up slugs and I have to say the amount of hybrids in the HOV lanes while I'm on the bus is staggering. There are a few that have 2 people in them but I've kept rough count on some rides and about half the vehicles that I see are hybrids.
The reason to keep hybrids is to get the auto industry to provide more of them - perhaps to the point that they no longer make the gas guzzlers. VA can't legislate that the auto companies have to make hybrids only, but they can certainly help with the demand.
|
Posted By: Wagonman
Date Posted: 09 Sep 2005 at 1:42pm
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
The reason to keep hybrids is to get the auto industry to provide more of them - perhaps to the point that they no longer make the gas guzzlers. VA can't legislate that the auto companies have to make hybrids only, but they can certainly help with the demand.
There is already a Federal incentive to spur hybrid vehicle purchases. There are numerous hybrid models coming out in the next couple years and there are waiting lists for most hybrids. I don't think giving incentives to vehicles with waiting lists is good government. I sure hybrid cars are now mainstream enough that they can compete on their own. Creating this artificial demand simply drives up the prices of new hybrids.
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 09 Sep 2005 at 3:52pm
Very astute WM.
and isn't that what the auto industry would like to do? They've had their run-up (e.g. premiums) on SUVs that progressively grew larger and larger. Now, they know (in concert with the oil industry) that to make more $$ they need to get on the "take" from Uncle Sam and he helps assist with demand plus provides incentives for already overpriced technology when there are viable, real clean fuel alternatives that simply need the market support.
Why won't the hybrid exemption expire? Why won't FFV gain HOV exemptions? Why don't diesels that get high gas mileage (like hybrids) qualify?
Plenty of whys, but then the consumers are all a bunch of lemmings who follow the crowd, or maybe even more so, they're more like cows and let the marketeers with their coordinated plans drive them where they want them to go.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 11 Sep 2005 at 11:18am
Wagonman, Are you saying the state doesn't count? That States should not tax - or provide incentives? Are you nuts?
We should all be thanking the VA Legislatures for their vision in allowing the hybrid exemption. I know it's hard, but just imagine what the gas prices could have been if we did not have so many hybrids in our area. Because the hybrids reduce the DEMAND for gas, when the SUPPLY dropped, the PRICE did not rise as much as it could have.
What we need more than ever is for the state to provide as much incentive as possible for there to be more, not less, vehicles with hybrid technology. Perhaps one way is to legislate that no vehicles can be licensed in the state starting in 2007 that can't meet the hybrid emission standard or the gas mileage. Another is to extend the exemption. After all, the express lanes with SOV hybrids and motorcyles still move an average of 35mph faster than the regular lanes.
|
Posted By: BillyBackSeat
Date Posted: 11 Sep 2005 at 10:10pm
The reason for HOV is not to remove drivers off the road. The reason for HOV is to move a maximum volume of people during rush hour. Hybrids with a single occupant don't do that. Hybrids save fuel for one car but per person even a hybrid doesn't save as much gas as a guzzling SUV that is carrying four or five people that is also contributing to moving a maximum volume of people. Think about it.
quote:
Originally posted by qorc
[br]bnvus
the idiot is you. I see LOTS of them, especially in the evening.
Everyone wants the rules to suit their needs so they can use HOV, I'm only questioning any exemption that does not remove drivers from the road. That IS the point of HOV. Not to "help families commute." Frankly, if these people really cared about their kids, they wouldn't bet toting them to daycare anyway.
Or is that concept too difficult for you to grasp?
Hug a slug today
|
Posted By: BillyBackSeat
Date Posted: 11 Sep 2005 at 10:27pm
Excuse me but what is going to happen to all the millions of cars in Virginia that don't meet your hybrid gas mileage standard? Jeez. You must have gone to Harvard.
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]Wagonman, Are you saying the state doesn't count? That States should not tax - or provide incentives? Are you nuts?
We should all be thanking the VA Legislatures for their vision in allowing the hybrid exemption. I know it's hard, but just imagine what the gas prices could have been if we did not have so many hybrids in our area. Because the hybrids reduce the DEMAND for gas, when the SUPPLY dropped, the PRICE did not rise as much as it could have.
What we need more than ever is for the state to provide as much incentive as possible for there to be more, not less, vehicles with hybrid technology. Perhaps one way is to legislate that no vehicles can be licensed in the state starting in 2007 that can't meet the hybrid emission standard or the gas mileage. Another is to extend the exemption. After all, the express lanes with SOV hybrids and motorcyles still move an average of 35mph faster than the regular lanes.
Hug a slug today
|
Posted By: dickboyd
Date Posted: 12 Sep 2005 at 12:52am
quote:
Originally posted by BillyBackSeat
[br]Excuse me but what is going to happen to all the millions of cars in Virginia that don't meet your hybrid gas mileage standard? Jeez. You must have gone to Harvard.
<>
Hug a slug today
Not to narrow in on Harvard, but I've often wondered how some people develop certain attitudes. They must have attended university to come up with such misguided nonsense. Blivets and reverse blivets. Stuff they should know from Sesame Street, like greater than, for instance, seems to be beyond their realm.
Maybe the use of calculators and computers short circuited the thought process?
Free the Shirley Highway, make ALL lanes free flowing.
Have you recruited a slug today?
dickboyd@aol.com
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 12 Sep 2005 at 7:04am
|
It's really quite simple - you allow all previous cars an exemption, similar to what is done with air bags. Just ensure that all newly licensed vehicles meet hybrid standards. Solves numerous problems at once - environment, consumption...
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 12 Sep 2005 at 7:16am
Originally posted by BillyBackSeat
[br]The reason for HOV is not to remove drivers off the road. The reason for HOV is to move a maximum volume of people during rush hour.
Originally posted by qorc
[br]bnvus
Um, the reason for ROADS is to move people, wouldn't you say? And having HOV lanes moving about 25 mph faster than regular lanes during rush hour seems to imply that the regular lanes are more congested. And that's with hybrids in the express lanes. Therefore, logically it makes sense to exend the exemption.
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 12 Sep 2005 at 8:32am
NoSUV,
You're absolutely right about the need for alternative approaches to "gas guzzlers". Seems the market for the hybrid electric/gas combo has reached such a point that the exemption is no longer necessary. Remove the exemption, have hybrid drivers carry the requisite HOV numbers and life will be better for all involved in the commute.
I like you're thinking, except the part (which you don't say too explicitly) about keeping the exemption in place.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 12 Sep 2005 at 2:35pm
quote:
Originally posted by N_or_S_bound
[br]NoSUV,
You're absolutely right about the need for alternative approaches to "gas guzzlers". Seems the market for the hybrid electric/gas combo has reached such a point that the exemption is no longer necessary. ...
NoSb, We agree to disagree. I don't think we've hit the point where the exemption is no longer necessary. I think we will hit that point with the regular lanes travel at the same speed as the express lanes - and we're not there yet.
|
Posted By: Wagonman
Date Posted: 12 Sep 2005 at 3:07pm
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]Wagonman, Are you saying the state doesn't count? That States should not tax - or provide incentives? Are you nuts?
We should all be thanking the VA Legislatures for their vision in allowing the hybrid exemption. I know it's hard, but just imagine what the gas prices could have been if we did not have so many hybrids in our area. Because the hybrids reduce the DEMAND for gas, when the SUPPLY dropped, the PRICE did not rise as much as it could have.
What we need more than ever is for the state to provide as much incentive as possible for there to be more, not less, vehicles with hybrid technology. Perhaps one way is to legislate that no vehicles can be licensed in the state starting in 2007 that can't meet the hybrid emission standard or the gas mileage. Another is to extend the exemption. After all, the express lanes with SOV hybrids and motorcyles still move an average of 35mph faster than the regular lanes.
What are you talking about? You didn't do too well in reading comprehension did you? I'm saying that the hybrid incentive has outlived is usefulness. I didn't mention any tax or eliminating other incentives. In fact, an increased gas tax is exactly what we need but the politicians are are too weak to do what's right.
There is not a "hybrid emissions standard" so I don't know what you are talking about. We should also praise our VA legislature for having the wisdom to give clean fuel plates to cars that have a dirty tier 2 bin 9 emissions rating. I'm also there are plenty of cars that can exceed the mileage of the Escape hybrid. Why should the Escape get an incentive?
Any incentives should be technology blind. Meaning that the incentive should be solely based on emissions and mileage. Let the best technology be determined by the marketplace.
|
Posted By: Wagonman
Date Posted: 12 Sep 2005 at 3:09pm
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
I think we will hit that point with the regular lanes travel at the same speed as the express lanes - and we're not there yet.
You mean the express lanes travel at the speed of the regular lanes...
|
Posted By: Wagonman
Date Posted: 12 Sep 2005 at 3:12pm
quote:
Originally posted by N_or_S_bound
[br]Very astute WM.
Now, they know (in concert with the oil industry) that to make more $$ they need to get on the "take" from Uncle Sam and he helps assist with demand plus provides incentives for already overpriced technology when there are viable, real clean fuel alternatives that simply need the market support.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
On the state level a lot of the hybrid "push" is from the car dealers themselves. They are a significant political force and they love being able to charge over MSRP for vehicles. Ever look at any campaign financial disclosures for delegates and state senators?
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 12 Sep 2005 at 8:04pm
|
NoSUV intentionally leaves out how much time people spend to slug, not on the road driving. NoSUV thinks slugs, and slug drivers, should spend more time commuting than the people that drive themselves. I don't know why NoSUV wants this, but there's no doubt.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 13 Sep 2005 at 9:26am
Is there any point in arguing with NoSUV? Go teach a pig to sing instead.
Sad thing is, all this bickering is moot. The Va. legislature is almost certainly going to extend the exemption. How on earth could they not? Most of the public would see a vote against hybrids as a vote FOR the oil industry. Ridesharers know the unintended consequences of clogging the HOV with hybrids; consequences that not-very-intelligent folks like NoSUV have trouble grasping.
Like toll roads, the exemption is available only to those who can afford it: seen any poor folk driving hybrids? That $5G premium isn't an option for most people. Only selfish pigs who want to take advantage of the HOV are buying high-breds.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 13 Sep 2005 at 10:58am
Sponge, Just imagine all of those rich folk with hybrids putting their financial resources together to get the legislature to allow them the priviledge of using the express lanes. If not the exemption, of COURSE they are going to press for toll roads.
If we had to have one or the other, which would we prefer? It is a 100% guarantee that non-renewal of the exemption will lead to toll roads - with hybrid owners leading the charge.
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 13 Sep 2005 at 12:12pm
Sponge,
Very astute. What legislator will vote to not extend the exemption in the face of recent events? You can bet the auto manufacturers are going to exploit the latest tragedies to increase their profitability. Selling more over-priced hybrids under false pretenses will do what they need to do for their shareholders.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: VA4ver
Date Posted: 13 Sep 2005 at 12:54pm
Not all people who own hybrids are "rich" -- know a few secretaries.... I "love" the stereotyping that goes on here.
Frankly I think that the hybrid issue will be addressed when the lanes are converted to HOT.
HOT is the MOST important issue, then hybrids, then more parking for slugs, then extending HOV hours.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 14 Sep 2005 at 9:31am
Yeah, there might be a couple of secretaries who choose to buy high-breds. There are far, far more people who look at the $5,000 premium on the vehicles and shake their head; they can't afford that additional amount and don't see why they should pay it.
Remember, MOST people do their daily driving on county roads. If Virginia were serious about high-breds for their alleged pollution-reducing value, they would have created a state-wide incentive, rather than an incentive only for a handful of NoVa and Hampton Roads commuters.
NoSUV is incorrect: there is no connection between the exemption and the toll roads. High-breds are not even mentioned anywhere in either of the two proposals. There is a zero percent chance high-breds will be given a free or reduced-fare ride on the toll roads, for the same reason carpools won't: it can't be done technically and it reduces the road's revenue for its owners.
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 19 Sep 2005 at 12:43pm
HOV and Slugging provides several benefits: 1. reduces congestion, 2. reduces polution, 3. reduces gas consumption and reliance on fossil fuels, 4. provides an economical commute alternative for the suburban masses.
Hybrids compromise on these benefits: 1. single drivers increase congestion, 2. they still burn gas so they still contribute to polution, 3. they burn gas so they do not reduce our reliance on fossils fuels, 4. they are premium priced vehicles not economically friendly.
The question is do hybrid owners need an HOV exemption? Or do the auto makers? Of course Hybrid owners could pick up riders. Hey, what a great idea! I love Hybrid owners who also pick up slugs! Think about all the positives!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 19 Sep 2005 at 1:58pm
quote:
Originally posted by raymond
[br]HOV and Slugging provides several benefits: 1. reduces congestion, 2. reduces polution, 3. reduces gas consumption and reliance on fossil fuels, 4. provides an economical commute alternative for the suburban masses.
Hybrids compromise on these benefits: 1. single drivers increase congestion, 2. they still burn gas so they still contribute to polution, 3. they burn gas so they do not reduce our reliance on fossils fuels, 4. they are premium priced vehicles not economically friendly.
The question is do hybrid owners need an HOV exemption? Or do the auto makers? Of course Hybrid owners could pick up riders. Hey, what a great idea! I love Hybrid owners who also pick up slugs! Think about all the positives!
But, as we found out with Katrina, WE MUST DO MORE to reduce comsumption - and hybrids are better than non-hybrid vehicles. Were it not for the HOV exemption, is there any question in anybody's mind that we would have LESS hybrids in this region?
We must do whatever it takes to get more hybrids on the road - and that means extending the exemption.
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 20 Sep 2005 at 7:51am
NoSUV,
I don't know the figures concerning hybrid demand in light of the recent increases in gas prices (even though the price is settling some temporarily), but would like to know the backorder levels that existed prior to and subsequent to the hikes in prices.
Me thinkst higher gas prices are the catalyst to generate increased sales of more fuel-friendly vehicles (hybrids included in that category). Seems to me that probably stacks up as a more likely incentive than the exemption.
I'll grant that expiration of the exemption may be suppressing demand somewhat, but isn't the reality this: No politician (notice I didn't say statesman) in their "right mind" (e.g. self-serving mode) will wittingly allow the exemption to expire in light of recent events.
The expiration of the exemption is a non-starter. My money follows the money (votes=currency). The exemption is safe for another year or 2.
most humbly offered.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 20 Sep 2005 at 8:54am
|
NoSB: What was the catalyst for gas friendly vehicles in this region prior to the run up in gas prices? Probably not much for non-hybrids, but for hybrids, it seems likely that it was the HOV exemption. What will it be after prices become "acceptable?"
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 20 Sep 2005 at 10:34am
Ok, don't understand the angst reflected there, but here goes again...
Hybrids (which are NOT clean fuel vehicles) exemptions are not at risk. That should be straightforward in the light of recent events, but I'll go one step further. The politicos don't have the fortitude to stand up and say "no" to something that isn't helpful to reducing the regional challenges (which also intertwine with national challenges) of pollution and congestion.
There are vehicles that contribute on multiple levels to reducing the problems associated with petroleum based fuels, but the politicians haven't afforded like benefit to those. Just for the sake of discussion let's look at ethanol.
Ethanol doesn't have a "constituency" on the supply or demand side of the equation. Petroleum does. Producers want you to "buy oil". Consumers want to have convenience and price expectations met. Were our politicians able to spend some quality time without the influence of the PACs waiting in the outer office, they might see that ethanol solves many challenges.
Want to reduce dependence on "foreign oil"? Incentivize, produce, distribute, and utilize ethanol.
Ethanol is made from grain...corn. We pay farmers (at the national level) NOT to grow corn. Amazing isn't it? Yet we continue to purchase oil from people who don't like us very much.
Do E85 vehicles receive the same package of breaks that gas/electric vehicles do? No. And they won't. Oil companies, car companies and consumers continue to pressure the politicians to do the WRONG thing time and again.
I like the gas/elec vehicles because they get better gas mileage--that's the only positive there. Battery disposal remains to be seen 5-6 years down the road. Hybrids reduce consumption on a per vehicle basis. The exemption does little to nothing to reduce congestion (not just commute, but parking) which doesn't help on the other levels mentioned. Want to help reduce pollution? Run on battery power in the mainlines where the average speed enables even the worst of the hybrid options to use electric.
Like I said, people can feel good about buying a hybrid (and you can pat yourself on the back for better mileage than many vehicles on the road), but it doesn't wean us from oil and the exemption doesn't reduce the number of vehicles on the road.
The exemption is safe because Ford, Toyota and Honda have deep pockets and the VA state legislature incumbents want to stay there (mostly). No one is going to step forward with something that 1. isn't popular and 2. jeopardizes their position (not mutually exclusive or inclusive).
Status quo with a positive spin normally trumps a common sense approach.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: Wagonman
Date Posted: 20 Sep 2005 at 2:34pm
quote:
Originally posted by N_or_S_bound
The exemption is safe because Ford, Toyota and Honda have deep pockets and the VA state legislature incumbents want to stay there (mostly). No one is going to step forward with something that 1. isn't popular and 2. jeopardizes their position (not mutually exclusive or inclusive).
Status quo with a positive spin normally trumps a common sense approach.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
I think the hybrid exemption is going to end. During the last session of the VA legislature there were a couple bills favorable to hybrids and they all were either withdrawn or voted down. I believe this was due to a lot of carpoolers writing to their representatives and the realization that the HOVs are overcrowded. I believe the politically safe thing will be for the delegates and senators to let the exemption quietly expire in just under a year.
There is also the issue of the new federal law for the hybrid exemption. Virginia is going to have to follow this and I don't think our HOVs would qualify. Under the law you need to have a certain average speed in the HOVs 90% of the time. If they measure in certain places there is no way this will be attainable. Second, the hybrids will have to have a specific emissions rating. This will get rid of at least half of them. None of the Honda hybrids without the California emissions package will meet any clean emissions standard. This might not be true of the redesigned Civic hybrid that is coming out soon.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 20 Sep 2005 at 3:19pm
quote:
Originally posted by Wagonman
[br]quote:
Originally posted by N_or_S_bound
The exemption is safe because Ford, Toyota and Honda have deep pockets and the VA state legislature incumbents want to stay there (mostly). No one is going to step forward with something that 1. isn't popular and 2. jeopardizes their position (not mutually exclusive or inclusive).
Status quo with a positive spin normally trumps a common sense approach.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
I think the hybrid exemption is going to end. During the last session of the VA legislature there were a couple bills favorable to hybrids and they all were either withdrawn or voted down. I believe this was due to a lot of carpoolers writing to their representatives and the realization that the HOVs are overcrowded. I believe the politically safe thing will be for the delegates and senators to let the exemption quietly expire in just under a year.
There is also the issue of the new federal law for the hybrid exemption. Virginia is going to have to follow this and I don't think our HOVs would qualify. Under the law you need to have a certain average speed in the HOVs 90% of the time. If they measure in certain places there is no way this will be attainable. Second, the hybrids will have to have a specific emissions rating. This will get rid of at least half of them. None of the Honda hybrids without the California emissions package will meet any clean emissions standard. This might not be true of the redesigned Civic hybrid that is coming out soon.
Wagonman, you might want to check with the VA legislative candidates on extending the exemption. In this case, I think NoSb has it nailed. So far, I've asked 6 candidates - 3 have answered that they support extending the exemption, 3 have not responded. One of those who hasn't responded (Kaine) advertises on his website that he supports toll roads.
|
Posted By: Wagonman
Date Posted: 20 Sep 2005 at 4:48pm
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]
Wagonman, you might want to check with the VA legislative candidates on extending the exemption. In this case, I think NoSb has it nailed. So far, I've asked 6 candidates - 3 have answered that they support extending the exemption, 3 have not responded. One of those who hasn't responded (Kaine) advertises on his website that he supports toll roads.
Let's wait and see what they say after the campaigns...
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 21 Sep 2005 at 7:28am
"After the campaigns".
Ok, good point, let's see:
Let's see how many people who actually use HOV as HOV will get out and vote. Even before voting, who is going to express their opinion (which drives which way they'll vote) through the various forums available in this democratic republic?
I'm thinking there will be plenty of folks who "vote their wallets" that are sitting in the main lines wondering about the "lexus lanes" (I don't like the term personally, but trying to reflect their attitude here). My money is on them voting for anything that reduces their congestion WITHOUT affecting them (that's how we like to vote, zero sum in our favor & at someone else's expense).
We know which way hybrid drivers are going to vote and I expect they'll be pretty active in voicing their support of candidates who talk about extending the exemption.
Then again, do the campaigns really matter? Big biz runs the elections. Those who come up with the cash make the decisions. Some people are so stuck on keeping what cash they have that they won't support anything that is a long shot.
The money is there amongst the commuting populace, but that populace isn't united (if this site is any indication of that).
NoSb's predictions (ALWAYS a dangerous proposition):
1. Hybrid exemption extended
2. HOT becomes a reality
3. HOV will pay eventually to use HOT if not immediately
4. Effective clean fuel alternatives will not become viable due to manipulation of prices and corporate influences in the elections (national, state and local).
I think 4 is enough, will make the %'s easier to figure out later.
I'm liking the higher prices at the pump, it is making the commute much smoother these days in the HOV! (Is that twisted or what!?!)
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 21 Sep 2005 at 7:45am
|
NoSb: I think you will be 4 for 4.
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 22 Sep 2005 at 12:04pm
If that's the case, NoSUV, then we're all screwed! But why should I wonder when it's the big money that drives political decisions anyway! Do you actually think for a minute that the car companies are selling solutions to our oil, congestion and polution problems? Hey, No SUV, "the emperor wears no clothes!" (Google that for a history lesson on the ethanol burning engine and the Bush family business). Auto makers are using marketing to add product choices! They have not created an environmentally friendly choice, they have created a choice that appeals to your "green" side and let's you sleep at night thinking you are helping the situation. Wake up; "Light" cigarettes still cause cancer! Hybrids still burn gas (not to mention the environmental impact of those disposed batteries)! Every car in HOV with less than 3 passengers adds congestion! You, and every other hybrid driver, have bought into a feel-good marketing ploy that clogs our streets with yet another fossil fuel burning vehicle. And the "better gas milage" argument is moot as long as they can make non-hybrids that equal hybrid MPG claims.
NoSb, I applaud your argument, reasoning and deduction. Ethanol is a viable solution, as is bio-diesel and others; renewable, plentiful, relatively clean, and domestic-produced. But these options won't be profitable for the fuel production companies until the unit cost is up to about $5.00 a gallon (which may happen soon). Until then, the policitians will bleed us dry with taxes, tolls (more taxes), oh and did I say taxes?! Don't you know; development and construction is good for the economy. Construction of toll roads will help the economy at the expense of our pocketbooks. And auto manufacturers will continue to profit from our needs, good intentions and ignorance.
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 22 Sep 2005 at 1:10pm
raymond,
Thanks, just a few insights and prognostications on my part.
I do realize though that DISTRIBUTION and DEMAND are where the potential for change exists.
As I look at the refining process for oil and the potential disruption due to this storm coming to the Houston area, doesn't it seem a bit strategically unwise to have to depend on foreign oil (not assured), coming in through ports on the periphery of the nation (not as easily protected) and located in areas subject to the whims of nature (e.g. hurricanes)?
Now, take some of the other options you've illustrated and consider how we could better buttress ourselves to mitigate those risks I stated. Where is the source for ethanol? (Ans: the heartland) Where could we produce ethanol? (Ans: the heartland) How would we get the ethanol to the requisite locations for utilization in vehicles? (Ans: existing distribution system with some adjustments)
Who owns the existing distribution system? Oil companies and independents.
What would they have to charge to make ethanol profitable for them? Same, maybe higher prices (maybe less post-Rita). Ballpark guesses and not backed up by any serious analysis.
How can I, as Mr/Mrs/Ms/Miss Consumer help oil companies realize that I want this change to happen? Start buying cars equipped to burn E85 then actually purchase E85 for consumption. Money talks and buffalo chips walk. It is amazing to me how many companies are producing vehicles that are FFV and yet we in America don't know this. All of the following make FFVs: Daimler Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Isuzu, Mazda, Mercedes, Mercury, and Nissan.
Ok, don't want to make such a huge leap by going to an 85% ethanol solution? How about asking retailers to consider E10 which has 10% ethanol mixed in with gasoline and can be burned in your CURRENT vehicle with no adjustments/modifications? Start the demand at least. Give them time to spool up production. Let them have their distribution infrastructure not go to waste AND they can even have their profits.
Now, why don't we do this? I dunno, lazy I guess.
My next vehicle will utilize alternative fuel(s). Hope I get the same tax credit/deduction that less effective "alternatives" get currently (hey, I'm not completely altruistic!).
I'm also going to start educating our politicos on this from my point of view (consumer with money and active voter who actually votes).
I'll still HOV since alternative fuels is only one piece of the puzzle and we all know there's more to the argument than fuel type(s).
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 22 Sep 2005 at 2:12pm
But don't you agree that less consumption of conventional fuel is needed? As has been pointed out but several, there needs to be a consumer incentive to have less consumption. Although HOV helps on the commute, it does absolutely nothing for the vehicle when it's not on the commute - and those who are permanent slugs are VERY guilty of that (100% of their miles are relatively "bad" miles for conservation/environment). So, what incentives can be given to bring down the consumer cost for vehicles that can ONLY have less conventional fuel consumption?
Hybrid exemption is one, but not the only or even best way. Others include banning all POVs from the express lanes, and configuring tanks/gas pumps so only ethanol can go it (remember "regular" leaded gas vs unleaded) - and giving those vehicles an express lane exemption as well.
The key remains to use less - and the only thing the legislature has done to help that is the HOV and hybrid exemptions in the bus lanes.
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 22 Sep 2005 at 2:53pm
Reducing is most definitely a part of the solution.
I am amazed at how people still insist on driving their vehicles the way they do and they probably complain as much as anyone else about the rising price of gas. An IMMEDIATE partial solution is to modify our driving habits. AND, this takes no material or technical solution to make it happen (e.g. it's FREE).
Interesting this website is there for all to read. Gives tips to saving fuel, yet who is willing to change one iota how they drive?
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/drive.shtml
Not to brag on myself, but I've reduced my speed to the speed limit. I also accelerate slower and decelerate earlier (without brakes). I monitor my average economy (per trip) and allow it to somewhat govern my driving habits.
Of note on that website: Most vehicles are engineered for most efficient gas mileage in the 45-55 mph range. Pigheaded Americans won't accept that even in the name of "national defense".
Use less, sure. That IS a piece of the equation. I wouldn't suboptimize an overall system though to achieve efficiency in only one part. How much impact does increased fuel efficiency have over what time period and at what expense to other portions of the system? And which system?
One challenge for hybrid elec/gas technology is that the most efficiency is realized at the lower speed city driving, not highway speeds.
One comparison (viewed from overall impact to the entire system): A vehicle that gets 25 mpg and carries 3 people (minimum) in the HOV equates to 75 mpg. One Hybrid Civic at highway speed gets 47 mpg (pulled from that website's EPA fuel economy numbers) with one person in the HOV equates to 47 mpg. Which is better? Ok, the system here is HOV make sure you limit your response to that system.
I don't think anyone said hybrids aren't a part of the solution. I think in ALL cases HOW we choose to use them and existing vehicles is worthy of serious immediate consideration for trying to put less pressure on the system.
Oh, edit and editorial comment: I don't count on government to do anything FOR me. I know they will do things TO me though.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 22 Sep 2005 at 4:19pm
|
NoSb: the problem with your example of effective mpg is that you are only comparing the miles used in the commute. To be fair, you need to also look at the miles driven while NOT on the commute - that gives the REAL figure. Limiting the discussion to just hours of HOV and hybrid exemption discounts the actual value of less consumption - which is what the incentive is all about.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 22 Sep 2005 at 4:20pm
|
By the way, both major governor candidates have now responded to my request for their position: Kaine AND Kilgore support the hybrid exemption.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 22 Sep 2005 at 4:36pm
Besides, if we want to make a fair comparison with the overall consumption, we'd have to look at the average mpg for the non-hybrids and the hybrids both during and not during the commute. It's unlikely that the average conventional car is getting 25 mpg (it only takes a few pickups and SUVs to skew the average).
To make the math easy, use the figures of a hybrid which averages 50 mpg (many of the compacts do - some get above 60 mpg - so this figure might be low) and compare that with your conventional car getting 25 mpg (none of the SUVs do this, so if anything this figure is high) and look at 15K miles commuting and 5K miles not. Interestingly, both will use 400 gallons. Carpool 1 time with that hybrid, and it's already better. Change the % to more miles not commuting (like many slugs) and the advantage becomes even more clear.
Want to have less consumption? Insist on more breaks for hybrids besides express lane exemption.
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 22 Sep 2005 at 6:17pm
I think we want SOV's out of HOV. That will encourage more slugs, which will reduce consumption much more than getting more people to buy overpriced, new cars. Hybrids are great, but they are causing increased consumption when they clog up HOV lanes.
This isn't arguable, so don't even try.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 7:31am
quote:
Originally posted by MDC
[br]I think we want SOV's out of HOV. That will encourage more slugs, which will reduce consumption much more than getting more people to buy overpriced, new cars. Hybrids are great, but they are causing increased consumption when they clog up HOV lanes.
This isn't arguable, so don't even try.
Of course it's arguable. Why can't all of the HOVs be hybrids only? Isn't that the way to solve both problems? However, there are too few hybrids to change the express lanes to HOV hybrids alone, so the interim step needs to be made for the express lanes to allow SOV hybrids. After all, didn't you say the cars were overpriced?
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 7:39am
|
See, what did I say? You have no plausible, or comprehensible argument. SOV hybrids is the interim for hybrid only HOV? That's the best you can come up with? Screw all who don't own hybrids, or want to spend hours getting from point A to point B using busses and metro.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 7:59am
quote:
Originally posted by MDC
[br]See, what did I say? You have no plausible, or comprehensible argument. SOV hybrids is the interim for hybrid only HOV? That's the best you can come up with? Screw all who don't own hybrids, or want to spend hours getting from point A to point B using busses and metro.
MDC - almost as silly as miltrades rant. Almost... Remember that price is determined by supply and demand, so when gas supplies are short and demand is constant, prices go up. How can demand be reduced? Go back to the major gas crisis of early 70s and institute buses only into the express lanes. HOV-40. And since hybrids get better mileage than conventional cars even when not on the commute, provide better incentive than cash to get consumers to purchase them. Why not hybrids and buses only in the express lanes? Would you help out the nation by buying a hybrid?
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 8:29am
NoSUV,
Sorry man, I think I did define the portion of the overall system I was looking at and that was adequately qualified to limit discussion to just that one point. The external benefits and impacts of that narrowly defined system result in some trades that reduce the benefits many would like to promote. Consider the impact to parking and environment when SOVs are encouraged. This is an offset to the non-HOV miles you described.
I think I granted you some limited benefit of the elec/gas combination. My major point is this flocking to an overpriced technology (much like the premium vehicle manufacturers had on SUVs and pickups during the 80s and 90s). I don't want to play their game and be subject to their marketing schema. Consider that SUVs/pickups DIDN'T decrease in price or devalue as fast because the DEMAND was so great. The price of the technology isn't the driving factor. The fear of gas prices will keep the prices elevated for years...until they come out with the next marketing gimmick for us to buy into (and they will exploit that then too).
Hybrid gas/elec is a marketing ploy with little overall effect. Give me a VW Jetta TDI that gets 50mpg on diesel and I can burn biodiesel to help the environment. Guess what though? The TDI doesn't qualify for an HOV exemption!
The marketing message is being received and replayed by hybrid owners (who frankly don't give a flip about the OTHER impacts in our area) to the politicos. The manipulated buyers then make the politicos feel good about taking the campaign contributions from the automobile manufacturers (and probably the oil companies too) by telling them how beneficial hybrids are to the NoVa region.
I do grant with the last couple days backups caused by gawkers of accidents that the hybrids are getting better "gas mileage" (is it really gas mileage if you're using batteries?) as they sit in the traffic caused by congestion exacerbated by accidents. And therein lies the challenge for the electrics, they get better "mileage" when sitting in mainline traffic. EPA mileage for Toyota Prius, 60 city, 47 highway. That logic alone says: put them in the mainlanes, unless they meet HOV criteria.
I am encouraged though....I see more and more hybrids carrying more than one person in the vehicle. This trend is a positive one. Most are husband/wife combos from all appearances, but that is a step in the right direction. More people per car = less cars on the road which is a part of many answers to the overall challenges we face.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: hotscr17
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 9:49am
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]Besides, if we want to make a fair comparison with the overall consumption, we'd have to look at the average mpg for the non-hybrids and the hybrids both during and not during the commute. It's unlikely that the average conventional car is getting 25 mpg (it only takes a few pickups and SUVs to skew the average).
To make the math easy, use the figures of a hybrid which averages 50 mpg (many of the compacts do - some get above 60 mpg - so this figure might be low) and compare that with your conventional car getting 25 mpg (none of the SUVs do this, so if anything this figure is high) and look at 15K miles commuting and 5K miles not. Interestingly, both will use 400 gallons. Carpool 1 time with that hybrid, and it's already better. Change the % to more miles not commuting (like many slugs) and the advantage becomes even more clear.
Want to have less consumption? Insist on more breaks for hybrids besides express lane exemption.
those numbers only work if the person driving the hybrid is doing around 60-65. anything over that and the gas mileage comes way down and we know in this area the average commute speed is probably 80mph. plus all the newer hybrids coming out (suv's and pickups) don't get great mileage (about 25mpg). there are some regular cars out there that would get better mileage than that so those hybrids shouldn't even qualify..
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 10:17am
|
Yep, there are Toyota, Lexus, and Ford, SOV SUVs in the HOV lanes now with their precious exemption. I wonder if the traffic counters that were out yesterday can count them effectively. Surely they can't tell whether one has CF plates in most instances as they fly by at 70+ MPH.
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 10:56am
Sorry everyone for my delayed response, I'm still reeling about NoSUV's comment "those who are permanent slugs are VERY guilty of that [doing nothing to reduce fuel consumption] (100% of their miles are relatively "bad" miles for conservation/environment)." I must be really dumb because I just don't understand how not driving a car, but instead riding as a passenger, does not help to reduce fuel consumption?! As a riding slug, I have reduced my weekly milage from about 300 to about 80. Wow, that is a ret reduction of 220 miles per week, at 22MPG that's 10 less gallons of gas per week, at 48 work weeks per year that's 480 less gallons per year. How's my math? Hmmmmmm.
Let's compare that to a hybrid that gets twice the MPG, but drives with one person: 220 miles per week x 48 weeks = 10,560 miles per year / 44MPG = 240 more gallons of gas. Soooooo, a single hybrid driver burns 240 more gallons of gas per year than a slug rider who saves 480 gallons of gas, for a net loss of 660 gallons of gas per year. Congratulations on your conservation efforts, NoSUV.
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 10:59am
|
Correction, that's 720 net gallons of gas annually lost to NoSuv's conservation plan. Looks like No SUV has solved the world's fuel conservation problems. Let's all jump on board!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 11:25am
|
raymond - just imagine how much better the world (and the the region in particular) if you slugged AND had a hybrid. Go buy one.
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 3:00pm
Brilliant! YOU park your hybrid and start slugging. STOP wasting fuel because of your greed.
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]raymond - just imagine how much better the world (and the the region in particular) if you slugged AND had a hybrid. Go buy one.
|
Posted By: 122582
Date Posted: 23 Sep 2005 at 7:01pm
If more slugs tipped, then more drivers (including hybrid drivers) would pick them up. If more drivers bought more fuel effecient hybrids, your tips could be smaller.
Everyone would still be saving money, and the environment.
Keep slugging alive - tip your driver today!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 26 Sep 2005 at 7:41am
quote:
Originally posted by MDC
[br]Brilliant! YOU park your hybrid and start slugging. STOP wasting fuel because of your greed.
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]raymond - just imagine how much better the world (and the the region in particular) if you slugged AND had a hybrid. Go buy one.
No, YOU go guy a hybrid. Make the world a better place. Yes, even you can do it.
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 26 Sep 2005 at 7:45am
In the meantime, you should stop wasting gas and get in a bus. Alternatively, you could drive some slugs in yourself to prevent them from getting into a gas guzzler. Imagine the good you'd be doing. Saving the world, and lessening congestion.
Dude, you're finished.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 26 Sep 2005 at 8:53am
|
Write again after you've bought a hybrid.
|
|