As blogged on
<a href="http://greenchemistry.wordpress.com/">my environmental site</a>, and as reported by environmentalgraffiti.com, London's Mayor Livingstone has taken stong action.
"London already charges a tax, known as a congestion charge, on almost all vehicles that enter central and parts of west London. Certain vehicles, such as those hybrids or eco-friendly fuel cars are exempt. Livingstone's most recent announcement, however, vastly increases the charge for the highest polluting vehicles."
I think that a big question remains- will these people be bothered by the fee? I presume that a number of them will, but think of the status for those who keep driving the SUVs into London! They will be put at the top of many lists, few of which will be complimentary.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 29
my environmental site
Jeff, Thanks for the feedback.
Sam, nice thought, but I doubt that will happen, or happen soon. You have to remember that London has a massive public transportation system that could probably could use the funds. Most of the system is already electric, I believe (the Underground, but not the buses).
Deborah, it isn't America, and people don't think about rights in the same way.
Just as a general comment, while in no way claiming that people in England are "better" than people in the US or that one country is better than the other, there are significant differences in how people view basic rights in the U.K and the USA. For example, people in the UK don't necessarily believe they have the right to hurt the rest of the world/city/country/village for their own self interests. Private gun ownership is not allowed unless guns are stored at a club. No "home use" of guns is considered acceptable by the voters.
Also, the mayor of London was elected while making his intentions on this subject clear, as I understand it. So, while there may be some objections, I doubt they will be significant or successful, but we'll have to wait and see on that front.
Another comment: as far as I can tell, lightweight, high-capacity vehicles that get good gas mileage are available. In any event, most cars carry one person and no cargo most of the time. As for accident safety, SUV drivers seem to have "an advantage" in collisions with other cars, but that doesn't mean they are safe. I'm not an expert on SUVs, but I wouldn't be surprised if you have to pick carefully, pay quite a bit, and have a recent model to find an SUV with superior safety ratings, especially with regard to tipping over while cornering at speed, maneuverability, etc.
James (in response to Sam): "...nice thought, but I doubt that will happen, or happen soon."
Perhaps, in London that may be true. However, Sam is speaking about feebates, which is also proposed by Winning the Oil Endgame: Executive Summary
"Most importantly, revenue- and size-neutral "feebates" can shift customer choice by
combining fees on inefficient vehicles with rebates to efficient vehicles. The feebates
apply separately within each vehicle-size class, so freedom of choice is unaffected.
Indeed, choice is enhanced as customers start to count fuel savings over the vehicle's
life, not just the first few years, and this new pattern of demand pulls superefficient but
uncompromised vehicles from the drawing-board into the showroom."
I mention this because Bill Clinton recently addressed the Rocky Mountain Institute's 25th anniversary conference. I think with the right leadership, these kinds of policies are not inconceivable at all.
...driving up demand on gas (which helps increase gas prices for everyone), helps fund both sides in the war on terror (with increased profits for mideast regimes), helps bring on global warming (due to CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions)...
Jeff: "...it's just a great vehicle, and if YOU hit me, I'll be ok."
And..., if YOU hit me, I'll haunt you!
And, at the mo, petrol prices in the UK are already nearly 10 dollars a litre.
My Saturn will be paid off next year and we're considering getting two new hybrids or something else a little more "green."
Sam and Steve: I was referring specifically to London (as Steve concluded), not dismissing the idea in general. As both of you know and as Ishbel remarked, in Europe, the tax on gas makes it twice as expensive as gas in the US. That tax, I imagine, helps fund many things that we don't do in this country. However, I'm not aware of tax rebates for individuals being common in the EU, but maybe that's just because I never paid taxes there.
Ishbel: Thanks for the local perspective!
Mary: I understand the dilemma. I don't want to pay for a new car for quite a while. In fact, my last two cars were bought used. I think the main thing is for people to do what they can, when they can, but not to cause themselves serious hardship. Maybe rebates/feebates will help a faster changeover of our current cars to better ones (I can't see why they wouldn't).
ModernDay P: I'm not so sure that is going to work, but maybe it will. The thing is, in my opinion, it would have already happened if not for powerful forces that want to control the market for their own financial gains. The end result to date has been slow R&D, something which is often subsidized by the government (but was not in these cases), and slow introduction of choices into the marketplace.
I don't trust the marketplace to anything that it isn't doing organically, which, as far as I can tell has been to make a small number of people ridiculously wealthy at the expense of quality of life for most other people in the US. An unregulated marketplace is exactly what caused the current mortgage crisis, IMHO. That is what "letting the competition work" has given us recently. That doesn't mean that market competition is irrelevant, but it does mean that there are places where the government must intervene in the market for reasons of national financial security and for other important reasons.
Thanks again for all the responses!
The problem with the "free market theory" is that "free markets" aren't "free". And that doesn't take into consideration the real cost of oil (as opposed to the subsidized price). Government has been in the "redistribution business" for decades - Exxon is one of the greatest beneficiaries. Funny how "free marketeers" never seem to get that.
James: "The thing is, in my opinion, it would have already happened if not for powerful forces that want to control the market for their own financial gains. The end result to date has been slow R&D, something which is often subsidized by the government (but was not in these cases), and slow introduction of choices into the marketplace."
Exactly. BTW, by increasing the price of gas for everyone by increasing demand, SUV owners financially damage people with efficient vehicles. Feebates would help offset this injustice - or perhaps a tax to help compensate for these losses in some way. How would the Brits use the revenue from their SUV tax? Maybe I should consult an attorney to see if a class action lawsuit would be feasible to recoup the money I'm losing because SUV owners help drive up the price of gas.
Morgan: I agree. I think that the goal is as you suggest- to minimize unnecessary SUV driving. There will be hybrid SUV's coming out (may one is already out), but if they aren't scaled back in weight, they still won't be very efficient. Anyway, there are quite a few types of delivery van and truck in Europe that we don't seem to have available, and these are much lighter and more efficient than SUVs. Of course, the countryside is demanding and difficult in many places (in many countries), whether due to steep climbs or mud or streams to cross, or all of the above, so an SUV or SUV-like vehicle can be very important, but the real need for these car/truck vehicles is very low compared to their popularity and use.
My Aztek gets between 20-25 MPG when I'm on the highway alot. There are sedans that don't get that type of mileage! I also us CA-40 which has upped my mileage to 30 mpg!
I am looking at buying a car within the next year, probably and I'm looking closely at the Saturn Vue hybrid; still large, but better on the environment.
OK, BUT when I go to Chicago, I take the train! Don't need no stinkin' car! So, go ahead charge me $50 for driving into the city...I don't use my car usually when I go urban....
A very fortunate option for residents of Chicago, NYC, DC, and others. When my wife and I visted DC a few years ago, I was seriously impressed with how easy it was to get around on the Metro. No car needed. You're absolutely right on that one.
Dan (to Dan): "...what are the options? I don't keep up with cars."
Hybrid SUVs