Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

carwow.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 360 posts

Re: Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

#351

Post by salty_biscuits »

ars wrote: post #274
asdff wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one ever says "why don't we charge pedestrians fees for sidewalks," for good reason. Bike infrastructure should be thought of as the same way. A paved bike path is going to be like a sidewalk: it will last as long as the elements permit it no matter the amount of usage it sees. Versus a road used for vehicular traffic that is heavy enough to degrade the road, that sort of usage makes a lot more sense to tax.

That isn't true. Pedestrians put more pressure on the ground than cars do. Google it if you don't believe me. The reason sidewalks last so long is they're made of cement rather than asphalt. If you made roads out of cement they would last just as long if not longer. And the reason they make sidewalls out of cement is they have to. If they made then out of asphalt they would decay very quickly.

Only if they are all wearing high heels... It isn't pressure that typically causes damage though, it is shear stress or frictional power.

Re: Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

#352

Post by freemint »

Robotbeat wrote: post #344
freemint wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should society be subsidising road damages by penalizing light cars? It is giving people an incentive to buy larger range electric cars which also need more resources for batteries. Lighter electric cars can also use smaller motors for the same acceleration.

I have nothing against incentivizing smaller electric cars. But the problem is folks will just buy fossil fuel cars of the same class because they’re slightly lighter (also can be weighed with an empty gas tank).

So what placing wrong incentives because they neutralise a bad incentive in one component is still bad.

Re: Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

#353

Post by matsemann »

innocentoldguy wrote: post #334
matsemann wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's my point, though. When I'm on a bike and someone shouts at me to get off the road because I don't pay for it and they do, they are wrong . I pay the same as they do, I just choose to use my bike every day to commute.

But that isn't what you said. You said that people who were complaining that bicyclists don't pay their fair share for the roads are wrong because most bicyclists own a car too. I responded to that argument and not the moved goal post you're presenting here.

I have honestly no idea what you're trying to convey. I didn't move any goalpost, I tried to restate my point since you missed it completely. Don't argue in bad faith, please.

Re: Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

#354

Post by google234123 »

enragedcacti wrote: post #314
google234123 wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All while having a $10k-20k lower MSRP Civic Type-R is a 40k car, just like the model 3 and it probably has high markups above the MSRP on average.

The cheapest model 3 on Tesla's website right now is $47k MSRP, the 2021 Type-R MSRP was $38k (there is no 2022) and the Performance Model 3 is $63k. So my bad its $9k-$25k MSRP, not that the minutiae of pricing is that important for this comparison. It was just to note that Honda isn't winning on weight by spending a fortune on materials or manufacturing like if I had compared the Model 3 to some supercar.

The Model 3 was still just $39,490 in 2021. So 1K MSPR difference and it did 0 - 60 in about the same time as the type r (5.3s)

Re: Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

#355

Post by unglaublich »

ars wrote: post #274
asdff wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one ever says "why don't we charge pedestrians fees for sidewalks," for good reason. Bike infrastructure should be thought of as the same way. A paved bike path is going to be like a sidewalk: it will last as long as the elements permit it no matter the amount of usage it sees. Versus a road used for vehicular traffic that is heavy enough to degrade the road, that sort of usage makes a lot more sense to tax.

That isn't true. Pedestrians put more pressure on the ground than cars do. Google it if you don't believe me. The reason sidewalks last so long is they're made of cement rather than asphalt. If you made roads out of cement they would last just as long if not longer. And the reason they make sidewalls out of cement is they have to. If they made then out of asphalt they would decay very quickly.

"Google it if you don't believe me."

Or, just calculate it?

Car contact patch is 4 x 160cm2. https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=... Car avg. weight is 1800kg. https://www.bankrate.com/insurance/car/average-car-weight/

Pressure = 28kPa

Human is 100cm2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedobarography Average human weight is 75 kg.

Pressure = 8.5kPa.

So it's simply not true what you say.

Re: Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

#356

Post by ars »

unglaublich wrote: post #355
ars wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't true. Pedestrians put more pressure on the ground than cars do. Google it if you don't believe me. The reason sidewalks last so long is they're made of cement rather than asphalt. If you made roads out of cement they would last just as long if not longer. And the reason they make sidewalls out of cement is they have to. If they made then out of asphalt they would decay very quickly.

"Google it if you don't believe me." Or, just calculate it? Car contact patch is 4 x 160cm2. https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=... Car avg. weight is 1800kg. https://www.bankrate.com/insurance/car/average-car-weight/ Pressure = 28kPa Human is 100cm2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedobarography Average human weight is 75 kg. Pressure = 8.5kPa. So it's simply not true what you say.

People don't normally walk barefoot.

Run the numbers for high heels, and keep in mind they might put their entire weight on the heel.

Re: Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

#357

Post by innocentoldguy »

frosted-flakes wrote: post #346
innocentoldguy wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure I know more about my area than you do and we do NOT use property taxes to pay for roads here. Property Taxes are used for things like: * The general fund. * Grants. * Costs associated with assessing and collecting taxes. * Justice Courts. * Education. Not maintaining local roads.

Then your city is the exception to the rule and can be dismissed as an outlier.

Ah, I see. I’m wrong, unless I’m correct, in which case I’m irrelevant.

Re: Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

#358

Post by frosted-flakes »

innocentoldguy wrote: post #357
frosted-flakes wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then your city is the exception to the rule and can be dismissed as an outlier.

Ah, I see. I’m wrong, unless I’m correct, in which case I’m irrelevant.

Now you got it.

Re: Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

#359

Post by asdff »

Robotbeat wrote: post #303
asdff wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? Penalize all vehicles based on weight squared. People shouldn't be moving to electric cars if they actually are concerned about climate change. They should strive to replace as many trips as possible with bike commuting and letting the car they already own and works fine sit in the garage collecting dust, versus willing a new one into existence from parts extracted from around the earth and perpetuating an a…

Because then you’re effectively subsidizing CO2 emissions by penalizing the significantly lower emissions vehicles.

You aren't penalizing the lower emissions vehicles such as ebikes and regular old bikes which is the point. Switching to a 5000lb EV that you exchange every lease isn't the solution.

Re: Electric Cars – fuel duty and road tax: how to replace £35B annual revenue

#360

Post by asdff »

mwint wrote: post #320
asdff wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another easy way is to tax wear items accordingly and have inspections maintaining their condition for safety. E.g. EVs are heavier and wear down tires more than lighter cars. The state could implement a tax on tires and mandatory inspections for tread depth like they do with smog checks for emissions in gas cars. They could use the same testing infrastructure and just stock every location with a penny to measure tre…

Tire tread is kind of a dangerous measure; you don’t necessarily want everyone switching to a super hard tire. Basically you can trade tread wear for stopping distance.

Tire tread is already something that is measured on the books legally speaking but is never enforced really as such. You do need to legally maintain tread. As far as compounds go once again that's something that regulation can enforce. I don't think today that people are buying hard tires that are apparently too hard for the purpose of getting less wear out of them.
Post reply on HN