SOV countdown
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=2949
Printed Date: 27 Apr 2024 at 6:58am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: SOV countdown
Posted By: OPfan
Subject: SOV countdown
Date Posted: 29 Sep 2006 at 9:47am
|
Only nine more months to go before the SOV's become HOV's![8D]
|
Replies:
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2006 at 11:50am
|
That's what y'all said LAST year - you were wrong then, too.
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2006 at 9:40am
|
Your luck just may run out. I'm sure you're contacting every representative you can in the meantime.
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 02 Oct 2006 at 10:26am
|
NoSUV is a hybrid auto manufacturer lobbist. What do you think?
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 02 Oct 2006 at 11:33am
Not all of us were wrong, at least completely.
I said they'd extend the exemption, but I didn't see the cut-off date for the new purchases, or the continuation of the exemption on one highway and its modification on another.
These variations and complexities make it even more likely that the exemption will be extended.
NoSUV is probably right in thinking that a hybrid-only carpool lane is coming. Which is fine by me, so long as they carry 3+ passengers.
(P.S. I saw a high-bred Civic this morning, license plate SLGFRE -- made me want to flip the ugly old red-haired bat off, but, on reflection, I'm trying to be a gentleman.)
|
Posted By: OPfan
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2006 at 3:14pm
|
Only eight more months to go before SOV's become HOV's. [8D]
|
Posted By: OPfan
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2006 at 7:45am
|
Only seven months to go before SOV's become HOV's. [:)]
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2006 at 8:58am
|
Spoke with my delegate and he told me that extending the exemption was in the bag. What does your delegate tell you?
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2006 at 2:44pm
Who is your delegate?
Don't you live within the Beltway?
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2006 at 10:19am
quote:
Originally posted by SpongeBob
[br]Who is your delegate?
Don't you live within the Beltway?
Bulova. Outside the Beltway.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2006 at 11:55am
Once a privileged class is created, it is nigh impossible to eliminate its perks. If we don't have toll roads, the legislature will eventually have to do the unpleasant task of barring solo CF-tagged hybrids, despite the loud whining of the Lucky Few who had the means to buy in early.
As more hybrids hit the market, it will become even more clear that it is patently unfair that the Lucky Few get HOV access while the Late Majority doesn't.
But who cares about equity or fairness any more? Hey, get your hands off MY piece of the pie, latecomer!
[:(!]
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2006 at 12:16pm
With the biggest threat to our way of life being global warming, it's only a matter of time before private autos will be able to be used by the "privileged" class. Of course, before the Model T, wasn't it that way, too? Do you suppose that roads were built back then exclusively for autos?
Best legislation we could have now is to ban non-hybrid private autos from express lanes. Talk about an incentive to trade in your fuel inefficient polluting conventional vehicle! And just think - government won't have to pay for it! That should make both advocates of less taxes and tree huggers happy.
Second best is to have all roads become toll roads with hybrid exemption. Quite easy to install permanent "Smart Tags" into all autos with those on hybrids keyed to allow free passage - with others paying. Shoot, tolls could be based on a combination of fuel efficiency and lack of pollution, with pick-ups and Hummers paying the most.
Or we could just buy beachfront property in Arizona.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2006 at 12:58pm
|
Suppose your suggestions became law and everyone bought a hybrid, so that hybrids >> non-hybrids. Then what? From a traffic perspective, nothing will have changed than it has now. Couple that with an ever growing population and less incentive to carpool, traffic would be even worse. From an energy perspective, why not push harder for forms of energy that have no dependence on fossil fuels.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2006 at 2:07pm
Ah, dark. Seems I've heard this one before from about 2 years ago. The gist is "why do something now when we should wait for something better?"
2 years, and counting.
Gore called it "An Inconvenient Truth." There are at least 2 key words here. Most focus on the last one - truth. What most can't stand is the inconvenient part.
We've got to quit waiting. Hasn't done any good so far...
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2006 at 2:39pm
NoSUV, as usual your argument is logically invalid.
To whit: what would be the situation today if we had offered HOV-free passes for all new cars equipped with catalytic converters back in 1975, when they were a new technology for pollution reduction? Once everyone had the converters, you would have almost no carpools left.
So if we follow your plan, once everyone has a hybrid (which will certainly happen), then everyone will have access to the carpool lanes, and voila, no more carpools.
But if you allow only CF-HOV's then you cause a marked increase in non-HOV non-hybrid traffic, meaning even more pollution.
Also, 99% of the country doesn't have meaningful carpool lanes. The only ways to dramatically increase the number of hybrids on the road are to fully subsidize the price differential or have the EPA and FDOT mandate that auto makers sell an ever-increasing number of hybrids each year. The EPA mandated catalytic converters and no-lead gasoline even in the face of a lawsuit from the Ethyl Gasoline Corporation.
We have already hashed out the issue of forcing people to discard their perfectly good vehicles to gain access to a public facility. Not all of us can afford to be so cavalier about car payments, NoSUV.
But I am sure we will all pitch in to buy you a place in Arizona, if you promise to leave and not bother us again.
(BTW, population growth, not climate change, is the looming environmental disaster. But since nobody can get anywhere near that sensitive topic, we fiddle on the edges with Easy Stuff like rain forests and baby seal hunts.)
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2006 at 3:45pm
Sponge,
You really need to think things through a bit better. With your example, the key is to change when change is needed. Once enough people have a hybrid, then the change is to HOV. For those who cannot afford to commute, economics will eventually solve that problem for them. Either they will cough up cash to commute (so much for free rides - who in their right mind came up with the permanent thought that they should always be allowed to travel at another's expense?) via public transportation, purchase a quailifying vehicle, or find employment closer to where they choose to live.
How do you suppose metropolitan areas with a greater population density but better traffic manage to make it? Do you think that the reason they don't have a traffic problem is because the workforce doesn't exist there? Or do you suppose that those who choose to live further away are wealthy enough to pay to commute - either with private autos or public transportation.
You were one of the ones who commented months ago about how rapidly the hybrid growth occurred in this region - complaining, if I recall about "the dramatic increase [in] the number of hybrids on the road" yet there was NO full subsidy on the price differential nor was there an EPA or FDOT mandate.
You may have noticed that developed countries have slowed in population growth - there are even a few in Europe with 0 growth. The looming disaster is hitting a thermal tipping point, when the earth can no longer self regulate.
Feel free to donate to my Arizona beachfront property fund, though. I'm pretty sure I'll live long enough to not have to worry about what you (collective you) are doing to the environment - my grandkids may not be so lucky.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 10:06am
I really am trying to follow your argument. I must be stupid, though, because I simply cannot understand what you mean in your first paragraph above. It appears to boil down to: "Too bad for you if you cannot afford a new car -- get on the bus, Gus."
Comparing DC traffic with other metro areas is invalid. Every city has its own set of issues. The commuting patterns in DC are unique to our city, and cannot be compared to, say, Denver, or Chicago. To pick only one thing, there are far fewer river crossings than for comparably sized cities. Also, we have essentially three contentious "state" governments involved in traffic and transit planning.
But you have said in other posts that slugging is somehow the cause of DC traffic congestion.
Anyway, back to hybrids. If you make the HOV an "SOV Hybrid Only Lane", yes, people will buy many hybrids. In fact, so many will be bought that in a short time, the express lanes will be completely jammed and the benefit of having a hybrid and using the lanes will disappear. So you have a self-destructive system there. Also, the lanes will be moving fewer people.
The goal is to move more people in fewer vehicles -- a guaranteed pollution reducer, not create incentives for solo driving.
But what really bugs me about your thinking is how elitist it is. You blithely dismiss the troubles of anyone who cannot afford a new hybrid car, and Scroogily consign them to the bus, conveniently out of your way.
Finally, your hypocritical claims to being concerned about the environment don't fool anyone here. You would not have bought your hybrid if it was not for the HOV exemption, and your attention to retaining your special privilege is 100% proof of where your interests lie.
(BTW, here is world population in billions.
1900 1650
1920 1860
1940 2300
1960 3020
1980 4430
2000 6070
Climate change, like ALL global environmental issues, is directly related to population.)
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 10:26am
quote:
Originally posted by SpongeBob
[br]I... If you make the HOV an "SOV Hybrid Only Lane", yes, people will buy many hybrids. In fact, so many will be bought that in a short time, the express lanes will be completely jammed and the benefit of having a hybrid and using the lanes will disappear. So you have a self-destructive system there. Also, the lanes will be moving fewer people.
The goal is to move more people in fewer vehicles -- a guaranteed pollution reducer, not create incentives for solo driving.
Sponge - breaking this down into bite (byte?) sized chunks.
Once express lanes become clogged, change is possible and probable to go to hybrid HOV only.
The goal. Hmm, depends on your goal. If the goal is to cause destruction of the planet, keep providing incentives to buy more polluting and less efficient vehicles. Check. Current legislation does that. If your goal is to guide people into mass transit (HOV-40) then the current legislation is exactly wrong. If the goal is to have 100% of driving, not just commuting, to be lower pollution and better fuel economy, then teh current legislation also fails.
How many hybrids did you see parked in the commuter lot today? Maybe the goal should be to have so many vehicles that are hybrids so that the answer would be 100%. Without taxpayers having to foot the bill.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 10:31am
quote:
Originally posted by SpongeBob
[br]Finally, your hypocritical claims to being concerned about the environment don't fool anyone here. You would not have bought your hybrid if it was not for the HOV exemption, and your attention to retaining your special privilege is 100% proof of where your interests lie.
Sponge - Second bite (byte). I purchased my hybrid 8 months before moving to the region, well before I had an employment offer.
The area in which I lived did not have express lanes - but there were toll roads (I-90 was nearby). On a different topic (toll roads) I don't understand the legal arguments from those who are upset about taxpayer funded roads becoming toll roads since probably all of the interstate toll roads were bought that way.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 10:38am
quote:
Originally posted by SpongeBob
[br]
(BTW, here is world population in billions.
1900 1650
1920 1860
1940 2300
1960 3020
1980 4430
2000 6070
Climate change, like ALL global environmental issues, is directly related to population.)
Sponge - 3rd bite. The data is meaningless without comparing population to climate change. If you could show a correlation between population in 1000 AD to global climate and track it for every 100 years to show correlation, then you could have an argument. However, the data you have chosen also corresponds to automobile production; you could just as easily show a relationship between automobile production and climate change -- which, although production has a relationship to population, it also has a link to industrialization. After all, if autos from the beginning ran on electric power, perhaps we would see a different statistic related to climate change.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 10:55am
quote:
Originally posted by SpongeBob
[br]
Comparing DC traffic with other metro areas is invalid. Every city has its own set of issues. The commuting patterns in DC are unique to our city, and cannot be compared to, say, Denver, or Chicago. To pick only one thing, there are far fewer river crossings than for comparably sized cities. Also, we have essentially three contentious "state" governments involved in traffic and transit planning.
Sponge - 4th bite.
Sounds like you are saying "I'm unique, just like everyone else." Where would you like to draw your comparison? Chicago? 2000 population 2,896K compared to DC of 572K. Has a big lake restricting commuting from east. I55 from the west, I90/94 from the south, and I90 and I94 from the North. Has an interior beltway. Nowhere near the congestion.
DC has metro; Chicago has El. DC has carpool lanes and slug system; Chicago doesn't. DC has worse congestion. Hmmm.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 11:24am
I hate to say it, but NoSUV does have a valid point on his "3rd Bite".
What is the reason to force everyone to buy a hybrid over a non-hybrid that gets better gas mileage (for example, a non-hybrid civic over a ford-escape hybrid)?
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 12:15pm
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]With the biggest threat to our way of life being global warming,
HARDLY! Rather myopic view of our way of life, America and the grander mosaic of life in the USA.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 2:23pm
darkprime,
Hybrids have significantly more horsepower than their non-hybrid counterparts. Look at the Lexus hybrids for example.
NoSUV is a tool. Hybrids aren't the answer to whatever problem there is and NoSUV knows it.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 2:36pm
|
I know in my example there was a wide HP gap. But then again, typically those vehicles with more HP get worse gas mileage. In the case of those lexus hybrids, don't they only get marginally better gas mileage than their non-hybrid counterpart? If NoSUV was truely concerned about going a hybrid route so the vehicles emmit less pollution than other vehicles, he should stipulate ONLY certain hybrids that are acceptable to buy. Maybe he has that in mind, but he always says "buy a hybrid" and never which hybrid(s).
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 3:47pm
The Lexus hybrids have significantly more HP than their non-hybrid versions. The V6 hybrid GS450h generages 339 HP and significantly outperforms the V8 powered GS430. The RX400h is heaps faster than the non-hybrid RX330, which has the same V6 engine.
It's great technology and all, but it's not the "environmental solution" that NoSUV is "promoting". Even if everyone switched to hybrids, they'd still be burning gasoline...
For more "wow", check out the 5.0L V8 hybrid sedan Lexus has shown. The LS 600h L.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexus_LS
|
Posted By: Luddite
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2006 at 9:02pm
|
Chicago has an interior beltway? Huh? What do the locals call it? DC has worse congestion? No true. Not only does Chicago have worse congestion, they have more congestion with three times the road miles. I was a salesman in Chicago for 21 years until recently and logged many hundreds of thousands of miles. I know.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2006 at 8:33am
National rankings of traffic congestion usually puts LA at #1, San Fran at #2, and DC at #3.
MDC, about your examples with the Lexus, you appear to be right, but care share the cost of a Hybrid Lexus over say 2007 Camry?
UPDATE: Starting price on a Lexus Hybrid is $54,000
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2006 at 9:30am
quote:
Originally posted by Luddite
[br]Chicago has an interior beltway? Huh? What do the locals call it? DC has worse congestion? No true. Not only does Chicago have worse congestion, they have more congestion with three times the road miles. I was a salesman in Chicago for 21 years until recently and logged many hundreds of thousands of miles. I know.
Luddite - the Loop
|
Posted By: sluDgE
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2006 at 12:26pm
Here's how wikipedia defines "The Loop" in Chicago:
BEGIN QUOTE: The Loop is what locals call the historical center of downtown Chicago. It is the second largest downtown business district in the United States, after Midtown Manhattan. Bounded on the west and north by the Chicago River, on the east by Lake Michigan, and on the south by Roosevelt Road, the lack of space shaped an architectural style dominated by high-rises. Notable buildings include the Home Insurance Building, considered the first skyscraper, and the Sears Tower, the tallest in the United States. Some of the historic buildings in this district were instrumental in the development of high-rises. Chicago's rational street numbering system originates in the Loop at the intersection of State Street and Madison Street, reflecting the central role the district has played in the entire Chicagoland region.
The term "The Loop" has different meanings to different persons. The Loop is an official community area of Chicago. The official boundaries as designated by the City of Chicago are The Chicago River to the north and west, Roosevelt Road to the south, and Lake Michigan to the east. As the downtown area and its many high-rises expanded out past the official community area over the years, "The Loop" has been used more generally to denote the entire downtown as opposed to just the officially designated community area.
The term even more specifically applies to the section of the community area surrounded by the circuit formed by Chicago's 'L' trains. The circuit runs along Lake Street on the north, Wabash Avenue on the east, Van Buren Street on the south, and Wells Street on the west. The name, however, predates the elevated loop, coming from a streetcar loop in 1882. Currently, most residents probably consider it to be the area bounded by the Chicago River on the north and west sides, Congress Parkway to the South, and Columbus Drive to the east.
This area has a wealth of shopping opportunities, although it competes with the more upscale Magnificent Mile area to the north, and with suburban shopping malls. It includes Chicago's famous Marshall Field's department store, now Macy's, a traditional favorite for viewing Christmas window displays, and the original Carson Pirie Scott store, closing soon. :END QUOTE
|
Posted By: Luddite
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2006 at 1:24pm
|
What we call the Loop = train tracks. No cars ever use it, but the Aldermen are thinking about allowing sov hybrids on it. Da Bearse.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2006 at 4:17pm
quote:
Originally posted by Luddite
[br]What we call the Loop = train tracks. No cars ever use it, but the Aldermen are thinking about allowing sov hybrids on it. Da Bearse.
So, back to the point.
From before (for those who missed it):
How do you suppose metropolitan areas with a greater population density but better traffic manage to make it? Do you think that the reason they don't have a traffic problem is because the workforce doesn't exist there? Or do you suppose that those who choose to live further away are wealthy enough to pay to commute - either with private autos or public transportation.
and
Sounds like you are saying "I'm unique, just like everyone else." Where would you like to draw your comparison? Chicago? 2000 population 2,896K compared to DC of 572K. Has a big lake restricting commuting from east. I55 from the west, I90/94 from the south, and I90 and I94 from the North. Has an interior beltway. Nowhere near the congestion.
DC has metro; Chicago has El. DC has carpool lanes and slug system; Chicago doesn't. DC has worse congestion. Hmmm.
Based on your posting, you agree with me.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2006 at 9:39am
We're all getting a good pre-Christmas taste of NoSUV's logic pudding and selective use of numbers, such as saying that the DC population is only 572,000, as if none of the drivers in Va. and Md. count, nor the millions of N-S bound I95 vehicles. Selective stats on sale here!
And remember, everyone: slugging CAUSES our traffic woes. Parking your car in a commuter lot and filling an empty seat INCREASES overall pollution because you are not dis-incented from driving your SUV, but buying a hybrid and driving alone results in cleaner air. Welcome to the World of NoSUV Logic.
The Loop is a commuter beltway, too. Right.
And people don't cause environmental problems, the environment does.
Damn baby seals! They keep getting in the way of my club!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2006 at 1:52pm
Sponge,
Getting the stats you request is a bit of a challenge. This is the closest I've gotten so far to compare apples to apples - understanding, of course, your assertation that we are unique, just like everyone else.
http://www.census.gov/prod/2000pubs/p25-1133.pdf
This provides on Table 2 a comparison of Metropolitan Areas. Chicago-Gary-Kenosha at 8.8 million folks and Washington-Baltimore at 7.3 million.
More people, less congestion. Did I mention that there's a big ol' lake in their region that makes it hard to commute through? And as Luddite has helped me to establish, there is no beltway to reduce traffic there, as we have here.
Don't like the figures because they are inconvenient? What a surprise!
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2006 at 2:36pm
|
I don't have anything off hand to support this, but the population in the DC region has exploded since 1998 and I thought Chicago has had very minor population increases. Today I wouldn't be surprised if the DC region is more densely populated than chicago. Do you happen to know the average distance someone travels to get to work to chicago versus that for the dc region?
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2006 at 2:55pm
dark - as sponge likes to say, it's hard to make a comparison. Just like we have some folks who drive from Richmond, Chicago has people from Milwaukee and Gary coming in. Others, like here, walk to work. Also, we have a beltway, so people going from Richmond to Baltimore don't have to go though DC; no such luck if you are going from Milwaukee to Gary.
I have a hunch that you might be correct on the population growth, but the swing would have to be > 1.5 million. I'm pretty sure that NOVA hasn't increased by that much, but I don't know about the Washington-Baltimore metro area -- but I doubt it's by enough to make a huge difference in the stats.
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2006 at 2:58pm
Even given equal number and potentially limited roads due to the lake (the reality may prove otherwise), we can easily see that for the N/S commute for NoVA there are essentially only 2 routes (I-95 plus variants and Route 1).
One would think a more equalizing approach to compare the two areas would be to normalize the comparisons and then perform the analysis.
Houston has an amazing traffic problem, but for no more the an hour or so a day in each direction. They have options.
This region has developed options (HOV being a primary one) that alleviate some of the problems. It just amazes me that any sane person would consider undoing, to any extent, A contributory solution that WORKS.
If one doesn't have an agenda in developing and expressing one's assertions, one quickly comes to a well-measured response and input in this dialogue. If one has an agenda, all data will be skewed in order to support the desired agenda.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2006 at 3:52pm
NoSB - if it works so well, why do we have the 3rd worst congestion in the nation? As I said earlier, we need to know what others are doing that makes it so much better for them. One common denominator might be that they require HOV-40; our HOV-3 is puny in comparison. Also, you forgot I-66 as an artery.
Shall we also compare pollution stats? Global warming isn't a fad, you know.
|
Posted By: Luddite
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2006 at 5:17pm
|
I'm all for HOV-40 - except hybrids must still go solo. Good thing our General Ass-embly is looking out for...solo drivers. Yeah, that's efficiency.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2006 at 8:04am
|
I-66 is an artery and is already used by many of those driving from the west into DC, but it cannot help anyone who lives say south of Springfield.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2006 at 2:30pm
quote:
Originally posted by Luddite
[br]I'm all for HOV-40 - except hybrids must still go solo. Good thing our General Ass-embly is looking out for...solo drivers. Yeah, that's efficiency.
Should be HOV-40 with hybrid exemption. It's a super non-taxpayer subsidized method to decrease the global warming trend. If we ever get to the congestion tipping point with the express lanes with only hybrids and mass transit, then back to carpools, both formal and informal.
You'll know it's working when the commuter lots are full of parked hybrids.
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2006 at 3:56pm
OMG, have we resurrected this insane discussion? Where to begin...
How about this: NoSUV is truely insane! Proven not only by the total idiocy of these arguments supporting hybrid hypocracy and radical mass transit communism at the expense of the simple, free, effective carpooling/slugging/HOV solution (which, by the way, works just fine for those who have seen the light), but also by continuing to argue the same points that have already proven a failure to convert anyone in this forum and expecting different results.
Our sane arguments only entertain the crazy.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2006 at 4:49pm
|
my, my, raymond - nothing constructive to add? Really hard to challenge facts, isn't it. Try reading the string before you put up a moronic post.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2006 at 11:34am
To reduce overall pollution, the express lanes should be limited to hybrids and buses, right NoSUV?
Allowing ridesharers to use the HOV lanes means they have no incentive to get rid of their SUV's or other gas guzzlers, adding up over time to more pollution.
Limiting the rush hour HOV lanes to carpoolers increases congestion on the regular lanes (as proven by the data on long commute times in DC.) Increasing the overall congestion leads to more pollution.
After almost two years of debating you, NoSUV, I'm wondering if I have at least have encapsulated your main points correctly?
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2006 at 2:01pm
I have wasted so much bandwidth building realistic and sane arguments, constructive and inclusive solution proposals, and debated these issues with you , NoSUV, that I concede to the insanity of this debate, (which is defined by repeating the same actions and expecting different results). I have read your rants, posted my reasoning in reply, and have learned: you can't argue with a sick mind.
I think, now more than ever, that you are either insane, that you work for an auto dealership/auto manufacturer/hybrid lobby, or have some other ulterior motive for your perpetual idiocy. You spend so much time online defending your rants, I have to think you are getting paid by the word. I'm content to sit back these days and watch newbees pass through these virtual doors, attempt to beat some sense into your head, and move on to more fruitful endevours. NoSUV, you are a lost cause! But don't mistaken this post as acceptance of your ideas; you are also very, very misguided and confused in your theology.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2006 at 2:20pm
|
rain man - did you even read the previous post including Sponge's email and the 4 bites?
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 12 Dec 2006 at 2:31pm
quote:
Originally posted by SpongeBob
[br]To reduce overall pollution, the express lanes should be limited to hybrids and buses, right NoSUV?
Allowing ridesharers to use the HOV lanes means they have no incentive to get rid of their SUV's or other gas guzzlers, adding up over time to more pollution.
Limiting the rush hour HOV lanes to carpoolers increases congestion on the regular lanes (as proven by the data on long commute times in DC.) Increasing the overall congestion leads to more pollution.
After almost two years of debating you, NoSUV, I'm wondering if I have at least have encapsulated your main points correctly?
Sponge, as they said in Korea, not quite right.
To reduce overall pollution, all vehicles should be SULEV, which is mostly hybrids at this point. Taxpayers should not have to subsidize this turnover from conventional to SULEV. To provide an incentive for this turnover without taxpayer subsidy, as well as to move more people into mass transit, express lanes should be for only SULEV and mass transit vehicles.
There is currently no incentive for many to reduce pollution by using mass transit or SULEV purchase because of the expense. In this area, the slug system is the primary culprit in encouraging people to avoid mass transit and SULEV solutions.
The regular lanes remain more congested than the express lanes, at least on I395. The regular lanes during peak commuting time never reach the speed limit for more than a few minutes, while the express lanes rarely travel under the speed limit. The express lanes have excess capacity in relationship to the regular lanes.
The congestion in DC is unreasonably high given its population density compared with other metropolitan regions.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2006 at 8:40am
|
NoSUV, according to 2005 census figures, Washington DC is the #1 most dense city population wise in the United States.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2006 at 8:48am
By the way, how can slugs be cheating mass transit if mass transit is already being close to 100% utilized? You would have a point if there were hundreds of buses running the entire work day and a metro/train service that made stops all the way from say Fredericksburg to DC every 20 minutes or so of the entire day, but that doesn't exist. And no, increasing ridership on those forms of transportation does not equal more buses/trains will operate. In fact, even when ridership increases, there other expenses go up so much more (take terrorism insurance for example), that they still have to have fare increases, let alone offer more buses/trains. In cases of trains, not alone is there a lack of funding, there's a lack of space to even store them or maintain them.
If you really think mass transit is the best option, then fight for that and set an example by using it! You attack others when they offer solutions that work towards the solving the problem but cannot outright solve it, but you do the exact same with hybrids which use fossil fuel and pollute more on the highway than an SUV carrying 3 people.
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2006 at 2:06pm
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]
The regular lanes remain more congested than the express lanes, at least on I395. The regular lanes during peak commuting time never reach the speed limit for more than a few minutes, while the express lanes rarely travel under the speed limit. The express lanes have excess capacity in relationship to the regular lanes.
Sane people call this an incentive to carpool, not to go SOV for ANY length of the HOV lanes.
The insane would suggest opening HOV up to more SOVs and would promote eliminating the excess capacity so the incentive is removed.
Trolls appear insane to many/most sane people.
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2006 at 2:32pm
It looks to me like I got your points pretty well covered.
1. SULEV or hybrid, no real big difference. So my synopsis was essentially correct.
2. You said the same thing I did with different words, again. So my synopsis was essentially correct, again.
3. You did not disagree with my synopsis, though you added that, in general, the express lanes have excess capacity.
OK. Just checking.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2006 at 7:52pm
quote:
Originally posted by darkprime
[br]NoSUV, according to 2005 census figures, Washington DC is the #1 most dense city population wise in the United States.
dark - I'd be interested in looking at the link where you got your data. Feel free to check out the official data in the link I previously provided on this thread from the US Census folks.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 13 Dec 2006 at 7:53pm
quote:
Originally posted by SpongeBob
[br]It looks to me like I got your points pretty well covered.
1. SULEV or hybrid, no real big difference. So my synopsis was essentially correct.
2. You said the same thing I did with different words, again. So my synopsis was essentially correct, again.
3. You did not disagree with my synopsis, though you added that, in general, the express lanes have excess capacity.
OK. Just checking.
Sponge, as I said, your words were not quite right - and they do NOT say the same things.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 14 Dec 2006 at 8:02am
|
Yes, I looked at your data from what was it, 2000 or 1998. Either way it was grossly out of date. When I come up with the link on 2005 figures again I'll post that.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 14 Dec 2006 at 8:22am
I hate to admit it, but some extra searching reveals whatever source I found was not entirely correct. Strictly speaking population density wise, DC isn't the most dense in the nation. It may be within it's size class though. DC has a population density of 9540 people per square mile (which is greater than Los Angelos's 7800+ people per square mile. DC's population can be found here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/21/AR2006072101621.html, and the density is figured by 61 square miles.
Regardless, the density issue doesn't address the number of poeple who travel into the city each day. I haven't come across those numbers yet and I know those are going to be a much fairer judgement from a population perspective.
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2006 at 8:22am
dark, thanks for taking the time to research this, very interesting. I'm sure a major contributing factor is the traffic choke points at each bridge. While in the other major cities mentioned here people are commuting via many major arteries into their respective metro areas, in DC we have a large number of commuters who must cross the Potomac via one of only a few bridges.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2006 at 8:39am
|
rain man - take a look, as I recommended, at Chicago. Notice that they have a worse "choke point" problem in that there's a big lake on one side -- yet not the DC metro level of congestion. And, I think the world would be surprised if data shows DC to have a higher population level than Chicago.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2006 at 10:25am
|
I still do not believe you can accurately compare DC with Chicago. Both have far too many differences from sizes, bottlenecks, politics, road designs, etc. Even studies, such as the one here (a very good read might I add) http://keepchicagolandmoving.com/mobility_report_2005.pdf shows various congestion metrics which show DC and Chicago trading spots from metric to metric. If you look here: http://keepchicagolandmoving.com/affectsyou.html, Chicago's CTA would make you beleive their traffic is worse than DCs. The only thing I think you can accurately say is that both regions have a congestion problem. Even the report I linked to says that there's no one solution for any region, nor are all solutions good for all areas. They even mention in the report that HOV is a GOOD THING. Lastly, the report is from 2003 observations. Next year we should see more from 2004. It's a shame there's such a long lag between these reports and the current time. Perhaps those who are doing the studies are caught up in traffic.
|
Posted By: bnvus
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2006 at 11:32am
|
Here we go again. Since the traffic in in the HOV lane travels at speed, don't you think it would be better for the environment for these hybrids to commute in the slower lanes? I mean it has been proven that they are no more efficient/polution friendly at highway speeds than a lot of other 4 cyl. autos? Certainly they would benefit the environment by switching to their electric motor and recharging the system utilizing their brakes. Irreguardless, having a car with 4 doors and one passenger in the HOV just makes no sense. People who drive/ride in the HOV make a sacrifice every day to ride in the lanes to DC. Why can't these Hybrid owners do the same? What do they sacrifice? Nothing Nada Zilch Zip. They get tax breaks, fuel economy, and privacy. Where is the payback NoSUV? You Hybrid owners are taking advantage of the system and it needs to end. Lobby as much as you want. Just remember, it is a two way street. We can (and will) lobby just as much.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2006 at 4:49pm
quote:
Originally posted by bnvus
[br]Here we go again. Since the traffic in in the HOV lane travels at speed, don't you think it would be better for the environment for these hybrids to commute in the slower lanes? I mean it has been proven that they are no more efficient/polution friendly at highway speeds than a lot of other 4 cyl. autos? Certainly they would benefit the environment by switching to their electric motor and recharging the system utilizing their brakes. Irreguardless, having a car with 4 doors and one passenger in the HOV just makes no sense. People who drive/ride in the HOV make a sacrifice every day to ride in the lanes to DC. Why can't these Hybrid owners do the same? What do they sacrifice? Nothing Nada Zilch Zip. They get tax breaks, fuel economy, and privacy. Where is the payback NoSUV? You Hybrid owners are taking advantage of the system and it needs to end. Lobby as much as you want. Just remember, it is a two way street. We can (and will) lobby just as much.
bnvirus - actually, the items you claim are proven are not. Try to remember that constant speed = zero acceleration.
Now, pop quiz: which is better for the environment, a conventional pick up truck with 3 persons traveling at a constant speed of 65 mph for 10K miles and another 5K miles traveling stop and go and occasional interstate, or a SULEV compact with one person traveling at that same constant speed for 10K miles and another 5K miles same as the pick up?
What you really want is to commute for free, and it really upsets you to see that your freeloading way of life is coming to an end. What will happen to you when your "entitlement" ends? How about "sacrificing" some money for your driver? Where's the payback, virus?
|
Posted By: Luddite
Date Posted: 17 Dec 2006 at 8:33pm
nosuv,
I'd rather have the redneck with the pickemup truck and two riders driving next to me than three solo hybrid drivers in the way. Kind of like preferring one dogpecker gnat to three.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 18 Dec 2006 at 8:10am
|
Constant Speed = NET Zero Acceleration. The car may have to accelerate to compensate for decelerating forces, such as friction or gravity (hills). Regardless, gas is still burned by both vehicles.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 18 Dec 2006 at 8:21am
|
dark, now you need to address downhills and a pushing wind. Bottom line is that LESS gas is burned by the hybrid at constant speed on the average ALL the time.
|
Posted By: bnvus
Date Posted: 19 Dec 2006 at 3:19pm
|
What entitlement do you reference? I am given nothing other than a chance to help fellow motorists reach there destination in a timely manner. I do not drive at all. I am fortuante to have a convienant walk to/from the lot from my house. I can honestly say I am doing some good for the environment. Who are you helping NoSUV? No one other than yourself. You're selfish and only care about your own privacy. Saving the environment...please.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 19 Dec 2006 at 5:26pm
Virus - do you even have legal standing? After all, you don't provide for the roads in terms of paying tax on gas -- if you were in a formal carpool and shared expenses, then you could have a claim. As for now, you really don't have a leg (or belly) to stand on.
What would happen if you, God forbid, actually PAID for your ride? Would you still walk to/from the lot? Or would you whine even more?
|
Posted By: bnvus
Date Posted: 20 Dec 2006 at 9:28am
|
NoSUV - Obviously you are getting desperate and have resorted to name calling and personal attacks. Very professional. I will not stoop to your level of sarcasm. In the past you have made some legitimate comments. But the time has come for all the free loading hybrid exemptions to end. I pay taxes just like everyone else. Share the ride.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 20 Dec 2006 at 12:04pm
no - you DON't! You don't pay for gas for your commute, so you don't pay the tax on that gas. That raises at least one question:
- Do you expect for others to pay for your share of the road maintenance costs? The answer appears to be yes - you expect your driver to foot that bill.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 20 Dec 2006 at 1:06pm
|
Not all road mainenance comes from the gas tax and not all gas tax money goes to the roads. You never know, maybe bnvus makes far more money than you and pays more income taxes, thus offsetting his lack of gas tax payments. Please think before you make accusations.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 20 Dec 2006 at 1:26pm
|
Still - bnvus expects for the driver to pay bnvus' share of gas tax.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 20 Dec 2006 at 1:34pm
|
Hey, if the driver doesn't like it, he could choose not to ride with him. Think about this though: by bnvus riding along, the driver will get substantially better gas mileage (as long as he's not a hybrid) on the HOV lanes. Better gas mileage means less gas which leads to less gas tax. It would seem by your logic that the driver here is no longer paying his fair share of gas tax either, as compared to the drivers on the main lanes.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 20 Dec 2006 at 1:36pm
|
Also, fewer cars on the road means less of a need for road maintenance. So by keeping his car off the road, he's helping the road out as well.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 20 Dec 2006 at 1:42pm
Another thought you are missing out on too: although the driver is not collecting money from the rider, he does have the flexibility of having his vehicle accessible at all times of the day, a flexibility that the rider does without. Since a ride home is not a sure thing, the rider is taking a risk of not getting a ride and is at the mercy of whoever does pick him up for a ride home. The driver on the other hand pays more by driving their own care, but does not have any risk about (relative to the rider) about how he will get home too.
What do you think about anyone who uses free services or items versus items they could pay for instead? Take for example an antivirus program for their computer: is it wrong for one person to use the free edition of say AVG instead of paying for a version of Norton? I see no problem in that. Like the slugging example, the people have a choice and are free to make their own. If they choose one that is cheaper than the other, there's often something they aren't getting compared to the more costly option. The same is true with slugging: those who don't pay lose much flexibility in their schedules versus those who do pay.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 20 Dec 2006 at 3:31pm
|
Hence the term "slug". If instead, mass transport was used, the rider would contribute funds for roads.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 20 Dec 2006 at 4:20pm
|
Using metro doesn't contribute to the roads as you suggest and taking the bus results in a marginally if any contribution to gas taxes. Another thing you overlook is how funds are dispersed in the state of Virginia: Richmond controls the money and historically is not a fan of sending funds to NOVA roads versus other parts of the state. Why don't you read what I wrote (re-read it if you think you have already) and you will see that the slug indirectly is supporting the roads. If you can't see that, then perhaps your problem is that you're simply jealous that there are people out there willing to ride with others.
|
Posted By: bnvus
Date Posted: 21 Dec 2006 at 3:30pm
|
You are arguing a stupid point NoSUV. Gas tax...really. It isn't like I don't drive in the state. So I pay taxes...for the roads. Are you going to get upset at me for not paying any state taxes also...because I am Military? Blame the government now for having miltary in the area, clogging up the freeways. It's the governments fault that their are so many jobs in this region. It's the governments fault that gas prices are so high....etc. etc. You are just one of those typical people who find reasons with change when it affects YOUR well being.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 22 Dec 2006 at 9:14am
Are you saying that there is NO relationship to gas being taxed and roads?
Are you also saying that you have no responsibility to contributing to road upkeep?
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 22 Dec 2006 at 12:26pm
I present the state of Pennsylvania as an example of the non-relationship between road maintenance and gas tax: Drive on PA roads, especially those north of Harrisburg and you will see that the gas tax does not effect the roads.
No one has said they have no responsibility to contributing to road upkeep. If you stopped insisting that they only way to contribute is by paying gasoline tax (which he says he does when HE drives), you would see this.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 22 Dec 2006 at 12:42pm
|
Ah, but doesn't PA use a toll system to provide upkeep on interstates? Are you instead advocating that a toll system to have users pay for the upkeep of the roads they use is a better system than using the state tax on gas?
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 22 Dec 2006 at 1:59pm
I think they need to charge twice the tax on hybrid gasoline. Otherwise, the hybrid drivers can't be paying their fair share of the road upkeep.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 22 Dec 2006 at 2:25pm
Good point MDC.
NoSUV, as for PA and it's tolls, the only toll road I know of is the PA Turnpike. Take it about oh 5 miles or so outside of Philadelphia and all the way until it ends around Scranton and you will see that those tolls do not go to the road. I'm not joking either, seriously ride along it and you will be appalled by the potholes, worn lines, broken gravel, missing or eroded shoulders, etc.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 22 Dec 2006 at 2:48pm
quote:
Originally posted by MDC
[br]I think they need to charge twice the tax on hybrid gasoline. Otherwise, the hybrid drivers can't be paying their fair share of the road upkeep.
Actually, Perhaps a more enlightened solution is to change the tax to $10/gal. Would surely stop the congestion problem - and then, perhaps, slugs would no longer ride for free. Do you think more people would be inclined to get a hybrid?
What gets me is how slugs like MDC feel that they shouldn't pay their fair (fare?) share - that they have an "entitlement" to not providing for maintenance and upkeep. But, oh my goodness, propose a TOLL on vehicles or try to better the environment by offering incentives to SULEV, and they go nuts.
Buy a hybrid, MDC. Stop making the world a worse place. Those who believe in Jesus at this time of year also have Scripture telling them to be stewards of the Earth. Do your part with a SULEV purchase. Keep slugging, but all of those miles YOU PERSONALLY drive in an non-SULEV are worse for the earth than hybrids.
|
Posted By: scottt
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2006 at 6:27pm
|
NoSUV, I still don't see you coughing up the extra money for those of us to buy Hybrids. If a Hybrid vs a non-Hybrid were the same price, then fine, you can gripe. But until then, please go away.
|
Posted By: bnvus
Date Posted: 26 Dec 2006 at 2:29pm
|
Tolls are not on the Interstates in PA. They are on the turnpike. Clearly you can distinguish between the 2 when you ride on them as to where the money is being spent. You are still arguing a stupid point. We all pay (gas) taxes to commute in the state. Some pay more, others pay less. I would think hybrids pay less since they get better gas mileage. So does that make you a hypocrite? You are not contributing as much as the corvette owner driving beside you. He has to run premium.
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 26 Dec 2006 at 3:54pm
NoSUV,
I'll pay $10 tax per gallon as long as hybrids are assessed $20 per gallon to be fair.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 27 Dec 2006 at 7:46am
quote:
Originally posted by scottt
[br]NoSUV, I still don't see you coughing up the extra money for those of us to buy Hybrids. If a Hybrid vs a non-Hybrid were the same price, then fine, you can gripe. But until then, please go away.
Indeed, you represent some of the worst qualities of the human race. You make far more than is necessary to have that "extra" money, but you have made personal choices with how you want to spend that money. Everytime you are faced with choosing between instant gratification and altruistic benefits, you put your funds into the "me first" category and then whine that you have insufficient money for anything else.
I've posed the question and gotten the predictable response - if the ONLY vehicles permitted in the express lanes were mass transit and SULEV, would you then have the "extra" money to buy a hybrid?
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 8:01am
NoSUV just doesn't understand the benefits of slugging. He completely fails to see that the drivers benefit from having riders so that they can ride in the HOV lanes too.
What's the difference between a driver picking up two slugs versus one who takes a child, spouse, or neighbor into their work place in the morning or afternoon? Imagine that, to go to work you have to pay your mommy or daddy to ride in the car with them.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 8:25am
|
dark - there is a HUGE difference between a carpooler (including family members) and a slug. In a carpool, everyone contributes to the price of the commute. With kids, just like food and shelter, transportation costs are borne by the parent. Both the federal and state governments recognize this and provide a tax subsidy to the parent. Care to explain to me how this relates to slugs?
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 9:47am
So the government subsidizes family members to ride together but not slugs? You're gripping at thin hairs here. The point is that slugs = riders and family members = riders. And no, not all carpools have equal contributions to the price of the commute. Some people are kind and do a favor by taking passengers. For some with long commutes, they simply want the company. In other cases, only the driver pays, in others, people chip in enough to cover gas, and in others, all equally share.
Do you really have a problem with drivers that do not want to charge people for rides? It sure sounds like you do.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 11:21am
dark - I have a problem with the usurping of mass transit. Take your slug line, for example. How many people go from that location to the Pentagon in a 30 min period? Enough to fill a bus?
The best way to ease congestion is for HOV-40; and the best way to ease pollution and slow global warming is to use SULEV. The current system has negative incentives for both.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 11:30am
|
How can these people be usurping mass transit if the mass transit doesn't exist? Sure there are buses (and rail), but the trains are filled and from what little I have taken the bus before, those are filled too (at least for part of the trip). Until there are buses that run say every 10 minutes from Quantico (or Fredericksburg) to DC, Rossyln, and the Pentagon, stop saying slugs are to blame. If the mass transit existed, then yes, the congestion wouldn't be as bad as it is. Our governments have never made mass transit any sort of real priority. Why not focus your energies on expanding mass transit rather than continueing SOV Hybrid exemptions?
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 11:33am
|
By the way, if you hate people usurping mass transit, why not set an example and use it yourself? Afterall, actions speak louder than words. If you really truely care about the environment, you know that mass transit will use less fuel and cause less pollution than any hybrid SOV. You argue that driving the SOV Hybrid is a step in the right direction for the environment, but chastise slugs who help vehicles move more people with greater pmpgs than your car. You keep contradicting your motives and intentions.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 11:55am
quote:
Originally posted by darkprime
[br]How can these people be usurping mass transit if the mass transit doesn't exist? Sure there are buses (and rail), but the trains are filled and from what little I have taken the bus before, those are filled too (at least for part of the trip). Until there are buses that run say every 10 minutes from Quantico (or Fredericksburg) to DC, Rossyln, and the Pentagon, stop saying slugs are to blame. If the mass transit existed, then yes, the congestion wouldn't be as bad as it is. Our governments have never made mass transit any sort of real priority. Why not focus your energies on expanding mass transit rather than continueing SOV Hybrid exemptions?
dark = I have focused my energies on both since they are somewhat linked. I have written to my state senator, delegate, Federal Representative, and the Washington Post. Our governments in othere areas have made mass transit a priority, from the new systems in Los Angeles to older ones in NYC, San Fran, and Chicago (note that those areas with older systems have a greater population and less transportation congestion).
Buses and rail don't exist where there is no demand. Since no slug is willing to pay for a ride, there is little hope for mass transit to work until slugs are forced to pay. That is the primary reason the state must put in toll roads - so slugs must pay and eventually fix this broken system.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 11:58am
quote:
Originally posted by darkprime
[br]By the way, if you hate people usurping mass transit, why not set an example and use it yourself? Afterall, actions speak louder than words. If you really truely care about the environment, you know that mass transit will use less fuel and cause less pollution than any hybrid SOV. You argue that driving the SOV Hybrid is a step in the right direction for the environment, but chastise slugs who help vehicles move more people with greater pmpgs than your car. You keep contradicting your motives and intentions.
dark - as you have seen from my other posts, my vehicle gets better pmpgs than ANY vehicle driven by a slug - and it's comparable to those used by drivers of slugs. Do you leave for the commuting lot with 3 people in your vehicle? Return home with those same 2 riders? NONE of those miles if SOV are better than a SULEV. None.
|
Posted By: bnvus
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 12:36pm
|
I don't get it NoSUV. You are all for global warming and mass transit, yet you still feel that Hybrid SOV's in carpool lanes should be allowed. And what exactly are HOT lanes going to fix? More money....to fix this broken transportation system? HaHaHa...all you are accomplishing with this is giving ANYONE the opportunity to drive into the city at will. After all, what is a few more bucks a week to drive in as a SOV. Not to mention lining the pockets of the contractors building the highway. Yeah that is going to fix a lot. I can see your blinders are working overtime. You are not posting any logical suggestions as to how to compromise the situation between HOV and SOV. Lets fix the system, not contibute to the problem.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 12:48pm
|
Stop saying that no slug will pay for a ride. Remember that this site has both riders and drivers. I myself have paid and taken mass transit when I could and when it made sense to.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 12:50pm
bnvus - the solution is in 2 parts:
- to get the people from slug lines into mass transit. HOV-40 vs HOV-3
- to get consumers to choose a SULEV over a conventional vehicle when making an automobile purshase.
Do you know anyone who has a 2001 vehicle or newer and it's not a SULEV? If so, ask them why they didn't get a SULEV. If the answer is unproven technology, that answer has been proven to be bunk. If the answer is that a SULEV is more expensive that a conventional vehicle, ask what it would take other than for the cost to be equivalent for them to have considered a SULEV.
I'm against raising taxes (which is the effect of a subsidy) for people to purchase environmentally sound choices, yet some incentive other than contribution to global warming must be pursued - otherwise, every vehicle sold this year would have been a SULEV. Too many people are short sighted and want to know what's in it for them today (note the national saving rate) instead of looking at what they are doing to the environment. After all, who really cares that the polar ice caps are receeding, that the foliage is changing to that usually closer to the equator, or that weather patterns are changing. Nope, all that is important is getting a better bargain on a gas guzzling higher polluting vehicle, and blaming the problem on someone else.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 12:52pm
quote:
Originally posted by darkprime
[br]Stop saying that no slug will pay for a ride. Remember that this site has both riders and drivers. I myself have paid and taken mass transit when I could and when it made sense to.
Are you saying that drivers are slugs when they are driving? that's a new one! When was the last time you heard of a slug paying a driver for a ride?
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 3:32pm
I purchased a 2001 vehicle in late 2002 - just before I graduated college. No way was I going to be able to come up with the funds for a new (or even used at the time) hybrid. In this case, the cost difference was astronomical. Not everyone is as wealthy as you are NoSUV.
Anyways, back on topic, another month down before hopefully SOV-Hybrids get out of HOV or become HOV-Hybrids.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 4:07pm
|
There will be toll roads before the grandfathered hybrid exemption ends. Don't take my word for it - ask your delegate!
|
Posted By: MDC
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2007 at 11:28pm
|
That's right. Enjoy your drives on I-66 come July.
|
|