3 ms·

These moves always come out of some sense of unfairness about electric vehicles not paying gasoline tax. However, we want people to stop using gasoline, and it

These moves always come out of some sense of unfairness about electric vehicles not paying gasoline tax. However, we want people to stop using gasoline, and it makes no sense to punish people for doing a net good thing for society by abandoning ICE vehicles. To truly make a fair system, the payments for road maintenance should be proportional to the damage done to the road by the vehicle. Thus, fees should scale exponentially with vehicle weight. This of course would make road freight very expensive, and that's a good thing, because freight should be shipped on roads as little as possible. Freight should be shipped by rail until the last possible mile.

abnry 6y ago
> Thus, fees should scale exponentially with vehicle weight. Work is force times distance. You have to factor in how much the vehicle is on the road, and the gas used is a decent proxy measure of that.
war1025 6y ago
I believe road wear is calculated as the 4th power of axle weight. Trucks have many axles to distribute the load, and are forced to stop at weigh stations to verify that they are within weight requirements. As far as road tax, the current system works pretty fairly for ICE engines, in my opinion. The larger the vehicle, the more powerful the engine, and thus the lower the efficiency. So semis are paying higher road tax than a little sub-compact car. Also, the more you drive, the more fuel you use, which means the more road tax you end up paying. With an electric car, the incentives are all out of whack. Roads don't wear less just because you have an electric motor turning your wheels. There is a similar issue with home solar panel installs. Utilities factor maintenance costs in as a part of their kwh rates. If you have solar panels rewinding your meter back to basically zero, suddenly you are hurting the utility company in two ways: They are buying electricity from you at retail instead of wholesale, and you are no longer paying your line maintenance fees. It's great to give incentives for new technology, but as they say, you can't scale losing money on every transaction into a profitable business.
- mullingitover 6y ago
  > As far as road tax, the current system works pretty fairly for ICE engines, in my opinion. The larger the vehicle, the more powerful the engine, and thus the lower the efficiency. I'm skeptical about that claim. "Freight trucks cause 99% of wear-and-tear on US roads, but only pay for 35% of the maintenance. This $60B subsidy causes extra congestion and pollution, and taxpayers pay the bill."[1] [1] https://truecostblog.com/2009/06/02/the-hidden-trucking-industry-subsidy/ https://truecostblog.com/2009/06/02/the-hidden-trucking-indu...
  - koheripbal 6y ago
    Clicking through to sources in you source finds most are based on individual opinions, not studies.
- goodcanadian 6y ago
  There is a similar issue with home solar panel installs. It is my impression that straight up net metering is very rare. It certainly isn't a thing in the UK where you will generally be paid much less for exporting to the grid than you will pay for importing from the grid. Moreover, as I recall, everywhere I've lived (several different countries) separated out a standing charge for grid maintenance from electricity usage. It is certainly the case where I am now.
  - war1025 6y ago
    > It is my impression that straight up net metering is very rare. Perhaps how it's done around here is different, but for instance this [1] caused a bit of an uproar among people we know with solar panels a few years ago. I believe the way it works here is that if you install solar panels, you are allowed to net-meter an amount proportional to your annual electric usage in the period before you go solar panels. I think there is a bit of room for growth allowed, so something like 1.2x. [1] https://www.midamericanenergy.com/nr-solaract https://www.midamericanenergy.com/nr-solaract
scoopertrooper 6y ago
Not merely that, but it disproportionately punishes EV drivers. The fuel excise currently stands at $0.423 so a non-EV driver getting 10 km/l would be paying $0.0423 per a km to drive their car while a EV drive would be stuck paying $0.2 per a km.
- taion 6y ago
  Per the piece, it's actually "2.5c a kilometre", or $0.025, so the EV driver is still paying quite a bit less.
  - scoopertrooper 6y ago
    Oops! Should read more carefully!

abnry 6y ago

> Thus, fees should scale exponentially with vehicle weight. Work is force times distance. You have to factor in how much the vehicle is on the road, and the gas used is a decent proxy measure of that.

war1025 6y ago

I believe road wear is calculated as the 4th power of axle weight. Trucks have many axles to distribute the load, and are forced to stop at weigh stations to verify that they are within weight requirements. As far as road tax, the current system works pretty fairly for ICE engines, in my opinion. The larger the vehicle, the more powerful the engine, and thus the lower the efficiency. So semis are paying higher road tax than a little sub-compact car. Also, the more you drive, the more fuel you use, which means the more road tax you end up paying. With an electric car, the incentives are all out of whack. Roads don't wear less just because you have an electric motor turning your wheels. There is a similar issue with home solar panel installs. Utilities factor maintenance costs in as a part of their kwh rates. If you have solar panels rewinding your meter back to basically zero, suddenly you are hurting the utility company in two ways: They are buying electricity from you at retail instead of wholesale, and you are no longer paying your line maintenance fees. It's great to give incentives for new technology, but as they say, you can't scale losing money on every transaction into a profitable business.

mullingitover 6y ago
> As far as road tax, the current system works pretty fairly for ICE engines, in my opinion. The larger the vehicle, the more powerful the engine, and thus the lower the efficiency. I'm skeptical about that claim. "Freight trucks cause 99% of wear-and-tear on US roads, but only pay for 35% of the maintenance. This $60B subsidy causes extra congestion and pollution, and taxpayers pay the bill."[1] [1] https://truecostblog.com/2009/06/02/the-hidden-trucking-industry-subsidy/ https://truecostblog.com/2009/06/02/the-hidden-trucking-indu...
- koheripbal 6y ago
  Clicking through to sources in you source finds most are based on individual opinions, not studies.
goodcanadian 6y ago
There is a similar issue with home solar panel installs. It is my impression that straight up net metering is very rare. It certainly isn't a thing in the UK where you will generally be paid much less for exporting to the grid than you will pay for importing from the grid. Moreover, as I recall, everywhere I've lived (several different countries) separated out a standing charge for grid maintenance from electricity usage. It is certainly the case where I am now.
- war1025 6y ago
  > It is my impression that straight up net metering is very rare. Perhaps how it's done around here is different, but for instance this [1] caused a bit of an uproar among people we know with solar panels a few years ago. I believe the way it works here is that if you install solar panels, you are allowed to net-meter an amount proportional to your annual electric usage in the period before you go solar panels. I think there is a bit of room for growth allowed, so something like 1.2x. [1] https://www.midamericanenergy.com/nr-solaract https://www.midamericanenergy.com/nr-solaract

scoopertrooper 6y ago

Not merely that, but it disproportionately punishes EV drivers. The fuel excise currently stands at $0.423 so a non-EV driver getting 10 km/l would be paying $0.0423 per a km to drive their car while a EV drive would be stuck paying $0.2 per a km.

taion 6y ago
Per the piece, it's actually "2.5c a kilometre", or $0.025, so the EV driver is still paying quite a bit less.
- scoopertrooper 6y ago
  Oops! Should read more carefully!