4 hours ago, Luke_S said:

Why is Ohio not apart of this?!

 

5 Midwestern governors agree to create a network to charge electric vehicles 

 

https://www.npr.org/2021/10/01/1041987104/midwest-electric-vehicles-charging-evs-cars?sc=18&f=1001

 

Ohio is apart of it. Ohio just is not a part of it.

 

 

Point of information: Hummer is now an electric-only brand.

1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

Point of information: Hummer is now an electric-only brand.

I didn't know that.  Point taken.  Let's hope they quickly expand beyond one model.

On 10/1/2021 at 3:52 PM, Foraker said:

I didn't know that.  Point taken.  Let's hope they quickly expand beyond one model.

 

I mean...whenever they come out, they'll be offering an SUV and a pickup version.  I'm guessing they want to see demand there before expanding to more models.

49 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

I mean...whenever they come out, they'll be offering an SUV and a pickup version.  I'm guessing they want to see demand there before expanding to more models.

Pickup supposed to be out soon, SUV next year.  Recently read that the pickup weighs close to 9000 pounds due to the batteries.  Good grief -- don't get in its way! 

 

But that's probably true of a lot of EVs, that they could be a lot heavier than their ICE counterparts.  Weight not only impacts safety but also road wear.  Might be a good idea to tax vehicles by weight and mileage as the gas tax continues to wane.

 

22 hours ago, Foraker said:

But that's probably true of a lot of EVs, that they could be a lot heavier than their ICE counterparts.  Weight not only impacts safety but also road wear.  Might be a good idea to tax vehicles by weight and mileage as the gas tax continues to wane.

 

I think weight also effects tire and brake wear, which would increase that type of localized pollution. Those chemicals that are released are even worse than engine exhaust.

55 minutes ago, Dev said:

 

I think weight also effects tire and brake wear, which would increase that type of localized pollution. Those chemicals that are released are even worse than engine exhaust.

Absolutely.  Transitioning to all-electric cars without any other change is not going to solve all of our pollution or petroleum product problems (see oil spill off California coast, and the millions of miles of asphalt roadway that will tempt continued oil production). 

 

For efficiency and better quality of life, I would like to see most inner-city trips being taken by transit (or on foot or by bike) rather than personal vehicles.  The only way to make that happen is to make transit just as fast or faster than driving.  Narrow the roadways, make cars take a more circuitous route, block cars from parts of the center city, increase transit frequency -- in other words, make driving more painful than taking the bus/train.  There will be political reluctance to make those changes, however, and so it will be a long fight to get there. 

 

This video is really good.

"Do Your Buses Get Stuck in Traffic? Traffic solutions & the Downs-Thomson Paradox" -- Not Just Bikes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQY6WGOoYis

 

Electric cars have regenerative braking which takes load off of the wheel brakes for many types of stops. Though the extra weight does indeed affect stops that have little regenerative braking (which are few). Also when the battery is over 90% regenerative braking gets turned off by the computer.

I'm currently reading this book.  I highly recommend it.  It's written by a Canadian couple that left Vancouver for the Netherlands so they could raise their kids in a quiet, car-light city:

When I bought it a week ago at the publisher's site (https://islandpress.org/books/curbing-traffic), the print version was half off (and thus cheaper than Amazon, even with shipping).  I'm not sure if the discount will be there for others who access the site.  Entering the discount code: BRUNTLETT gets you 25% off, however.  The e-version is, of course, much cheaper.   When I last checked, no libraries in Ohio had it.

 

On 10/16/2021 at 9:32 AM, gildone said:

I'm currently reading this book.  I highly recommend it.  It's written by a Canadian couple that left Vancouver for the Netherlands so they could raise their kids in a quiet, car-light city:

When I bought it a week ago at the publisher's site (https://islandpress.org/books/curbing-traffic), the print version was half off (and thus cheaper than Amazon, even with shipping).  I'm not sure if the discount will be there for others who access the site.  Entering the discount code: BRUNTLETT gets you 25% off, however.  The e-version is, of course, much cheaper.   When I last checked, no libraries in Ohio had it.

Apparently there is a time limit on editing posts... UPDATE: Just figured out today:  Entering the code HALF gets you 50% off when you order directly from Island Press.  

I was watching a Yes Theory video re: an abandoned city in Cyprus, that's been in the demilitarized buffer zone since 1974. 

 

What stuck out to me, though, was the protected bike lanes....... 

 

 

3 hours ago, YABO713 said:

I was watching a Yes Theory video re: an abandoned city in Cyprus, that's been in the demilitarized buffer zone since 1974. 

 

What stuck out to me, though, was the protected bike lanes....... 

 

 

I saw painted bike lanes, but missed the protected bike lanes.  Where in the video did you see protected bike lanes?

On 10/16/2021 at 9:32 AM, gildone said:

I'm currently reading this book.  I highly recommend it.  It's written by a Canadian couple that left Vancouver for the Netherlands so they could raise their kids in a quiet, car-light city:

When I bought it a week ago at the publisher's site (https://islandpress.org/books/curbing-traffic), the print version was half off (and thus cheaper than Amazon, even with shipping).  I'm not sure if the discount will be there for others who access the site.  Entering the discount code: BRUNTLETT gets you 25% off, however.  The e-version is, of course, much cheaper.   When I last checked, no libraries in Ohio had it.

I suggested that the Cincinnati Library purchase the book and it looks like they have ordered 4 copies, so soon there will be at least one Library system to have the book available. Library Listing Here

 

I discovered another great podcast:  It's called Active Towns.  Cleveland's own Angie Schmitt was on the podcast in October 2020.  It should be available on most podcast apps. 

https://activetowns.transistor.fm/

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/593557-republicans-urge-states-to-ignore-biden-administration-infrastructure-funding

 

Excerpt:  Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) penned a letter to governors on Wednesday encouraging them to ignore a December memo from the Federal Highway Administration that called for recipients of highway funding to take action on projects that enhance the conditions and safety of existing transportation infrastructure before proceeding with efforts to add new travel lanes.

 

Federal Highway Administration Deputy Administrator Stephanie Pollack wrote in the December memo that her agency would “implement policies and undertake actions to encourage—and where permitted by law, require—recipients of Federal highway funding to select projects that improve the condition and safety of existing transportation infrastructure within the right-of-way before advancing projects that add new general purpose travel lanes serving single occupancy vehicles.”

 

Another country, but the same thing happened here, only worse...

 

 

"we have already reaped the main benefits of the interstate [highway] system (connecting places across the country for the flow of goods and people). Building more is only doing harm. We can't get any more value out of this system—just destruction.”  ~ Charles Marohn, Founder of Strong Towns

 

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2022/4/5/the-grim-reaper-of-small-towns

Edited April 7, 20223 yr by gildone

The most important control points in the interstate system were the ones developed first and, for the most part, remain the most important ones today.

That collective gasp you just heard was every highway contractor expressing surprise and dismay that the secret is finally out. Yes, you can spend federal highway money on trains n transit....

 

 

A trenchant critique of traffic engineering:

https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2022/05/26/trenchant-critique-traffic-engineering

 

Separated Bike Lanes Means Safer Streets, Study Says

A 13-year study of a dozen cities found that protected bike lanes led to a drastic decline in fatalities for all users of the road.

 

"Cities that build protected lanes for cyclists end up with safer roads for people on bikes and people in cars and on foot, a new study of 12 large metropolises revealed Wednesday."

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2019/05/29/protect-yourself-separated-bike-lanes-means-safer-streets-study-says/

 

road use tax instead of gasoline tax —

 

 

 

As fuel taxes plummet, states weigh charging by the mile instead of the tank

 

By JULIE CARR SMYTH

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Evan Burroughs has spent eight years touting the virtues of an Oregon pilot program charging motorists by the distance their vehicle travels rather than the gas it guzzles, yet his own mother still hasn’t bought in.

 

Margaret Burroughs, 85, said she has no intention of inserting a tracking device on her Nissan Murano to record the miles she drives to get groceries or attend needlepoint meetings. She figures it’s far less hassle to just pay at the pump, as Americans have done for more than a century.

 

“It’s probably a good thing, but on top of everybody else’s stress today, it’s just one more thing,” she said of Oregon’s first-in-the-nation initiative, which is run by the state transportation department where her son serves as a survey analyst.

 

Burroughs’ reluctance exemplifies the myriad hurdles U.S. states face as they experiment with road usage charging programs aimed at one day replacing motor fuel taxes, which are generating less each year, in part due to fuel efficiency and the rise of electric cars.

 

more:
https://apnews.com/article/gas-tax-highway-maintenance-mileage-user-fees-15abaae7e6097946f900e87be95214e1

^ As EV's become more prevalent on the roads, there will need to be something to account for their use. Don't know if this is the right path or if there will be other options 

4 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

^ As EV's become more prevalent on the roads, there will need to be something to account for their use. Don't know if this is the right path or if there will be other options 

The current method is a flat increased registration fee of $200/year.  Obviously a charge per mile is way better than that.  If vehicle weight were taken into account, that would be even better.

For anyone afraid of their cars being tracked by tech so you can pay per mile, I've got some bad news for you. That tech is already on your car.

 

Since existing GPS tech on cars is part of the manufacturer's service, maybe the solution is for people to pay the manufacturer for the use of their car, then the manufacturer pays the government? Perhaps that might ease some privacy concerns? And if people don't pay, the manufacturer can put a lien on their car to repossess it?

 

And, who knows, conservatives can start making the argument that car manufacturers should cut the government out of the picture and start buying, managing, maintaining, insuring and policing highways. Then after a few years of horrific financial losses, they'll realize how much of a money loser they are and thus how government subsidizes them to the detriment of rail and transit?

I'm confused by this thread, if you already have to register your car, why not just report (or have the odometer read) while registering the car? Apply tax based on difference from previous year(s). You could include a weight factor if you wanted to. Easy, no need for tracking.

 

It's not a completely perfect system, but unless someone tampers with their odometer, they will pay the tax eventually, either next time they have to re-register, or when they sell the car. (I imagine most years people could self report). Perhaps some clunkers will slip through (dies before next registration, not resold), but as those are generally only driven by the poorest members of society, that doesn't bother me much. 

 

Far simpler solution than a high tech tracking system, and it doesn't present any privacy concerns. No need to overcomplicate things. 

That would mean paying a huge amount of money all at once rather than a pay-as-you-go method.

56 minutes ago, KJP said:

That would mean paying a huge amount of money all at once rather than a pay-as-you-go method.

Yup! It would probably feel more like an annual (variable) registration fee. If it collects the same amount of money as current gas taxes it would probably be around $100-$400 depending on miles driven. 

 

I don't see why the federal government couldn't get with the times and offer people the ability to pay it in small monthly chunks though. Paid monthly it wouldn't be much more than a streaming service or two.

 

Even if it ends up being higher (since current gas taxes are inadequate) it still wouldn't be that bad, and would still be far less than what people are currently paying for gasoline.

 

Assessing total miles driven annually is far easier and simpler than tracking people's driving habits in real time, and there's no opportunity for governmental abuse. Overhead should be less. Simpler seems better to me. If up front cost is the concern, an option to pay monthly should address that concern. 

 

Edit: This could also only be assessed at the BMV, and paid when filing taxes. Some people could primarily pay with their refund. Additionally I think people could choose to have a certain number of "miles" withheld throughout the course of the year. This way it would be paid slowly through normal employment taxes throughout the year. The difference would be settled at the end of the year when you file, same as it is with other forms of taxes. Lots of potential ways this could be done. 

Insurance companies would love knowing how many miles you actually drive every year, too. I imagine they would be on board

On 4/7/2022 at 6:31 PM, GCrites said:

The most important control points in the interstate system were the ones developed first and, for the most part, remain the most important ones today.

 

 

The network is 1960~ preserved in amber.  If you were a little ahead, regionally, you got to be a control city and have two or more interstates cross your locale.  Really, almost nowhere has managed to emerge from obscurity that wasn't at one of these junctions. 

 

There are some poor performers, like Lexington, KY and Chattanooga, TN and Toledo, OH, who still operate on the fringes of American society, despite their bountiful interstate highway access. 

 

But has even a single city emerged that isn't part of the system?  Fresno, CA? 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, KJP said:

That would mean paying a huge amount of money all at once rather than a pay-as-you-go method.

 

A lot of states already send car owners substantial once-yearly bills with personal property excise taxes on vehicles, based on blue book value or some other formula. We discovered this fact when we moved to Pawtucket, RI for a year in 2009 - tax rate there was something like $53/year per $1000 of assessed value, and varied by town/city. We had two fairly new cars, and had to pay a (surprise) bill of over $2000.

 

Nowadays having one hybrid and one EV in our fleet, I'm not a big fan of the extra annual registration fees Ohio currently asks for. I also get it, though I don't think our state legislature was primarily concerned about paying for roads when imposing these fee. An annual per-mile tax, with a multiplier for GVWR since heavier vehicles make a bigger impact on roads, seems a lot more fair. If done right, the fees should be roughly comparable to what gets paid annually in state gas taxes for a comparable ICE vehicle. Hybrids should pay a portion of that, especially plug-in hybrids. It gets complicated though, the advantage of taxing at the pump is at least some of those miles are being driven in Ohio - what about EV/hybrid owners who travel extensively?

Or eliminate the gas tax entirely, raise state income taxes and pay for roads out of the general fund. Though that seems unfair as well...

23 minutes ago, mrCharlie said:

An annual per-mile tax, with a multiplier for GVWR since heavier vehicles make a bigger impact on roads, seems a lot more fair. If done right, the fees should be roughly comparable to what gets paid annually in state gas taxes for a comparable ICE vehicle. Hybrids should pay a portion of that, especially plug-in hybrids. It gets complicated though, the advantage of taxing at the pump is at least some of those miles are being driven in Ohio - what about EV/hybrid owners who travel extensively?

 

That last point is among the larger obstacles.  Logistically, what @Ethan says is feasible and even moreso when you consider that the BMV, like most state agencies, is more online-capable than it used to be, too.  I did my reregistration online, paid online, and got my sticker in the mail.  The BMV check might need to be done in person to physically see the odometer, but the payments themselves can be done much like income taxes are now: withheld regularly and netted out annually.

 

But if Ohio replaced its gas tax with a system like this, you'd have every incentive to register your car in a state with no such GVWR-by-mile payment system, if you could find a way to do so.  Register where there's no annual mileage fee for registered vehicles and drive where there's no longer any gas tax.

16 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

That last point is among the larger obstacles.  Logistically, what @Ethan says is feasible and even moreso when you consider that the BMV, like most state agencies, is more online-capable than it used to be, too.  I did my reregistration online, paid online, and got my sticker in the mail.  The BMV check might need to be done in person to physically see the odometer, but the payments themselves can be done much like income taxes are now: withheld regularly and netted out annually.

 

But if Ohio replaced its gas tax with a system like this, you'd have every incentive to register your car in a state with no such GVWR-by-mile payment system, if you could find a way to do so.  Register where there's no annual mileage fee for registered vehicles and drive where there's no longer any gas tax.

You are incentivized to do that, but I'd assume it would be done so infrequently it's not worth worrying about.  Is it even possible to register in a state you don't live in?  As an EV owner, I'm already incentivized to register in a state with no $200 registration fee and it's never even crossed my mind.  Also, I'd imagine that Ohio would not be the pioneering state on a per-mile fee, and there wouldn't be a ton of safe-haven states to register in by the time Ohio does it.

 

A per-mile fee with adjustment based on GVWR seems like the fairest route and I agree it should be possible to do it simply and broken into monthly payments.  I'd imagine the GVWR part will be a steep climb in Ohio and elsewhere if it's seen as punishing those with large trucks.

1 minute ago, acd said:

A per-mile fee with adjustment based on GVWR seems like the fairest route and I agree it should be possible to do it simply and broken into monthly payments.  I'd imagine the GVWR part will be a steep climb in Ohio and elsewhere if it's seen as punishing those with large trucks.

 

Don't we already have certain categories built into the state's system for other purposes that differentiate based on number of axles?  Not quite as specific as vehicle weight but we could probably piggyback on that for simplicity's sake.

 

And I'm an EV owner as well and I would hope that if we do finally go to a weight-mile replacement for the gas tax, the steep EV registration fee would go away with it.  The point of that was a flat fee to approximate a year's worth of gas tax revenue.

 

more on congestion pricing — 

 

 

Congestion pricing coming to NYC after Federal Highway Administration signs off

 

BY ELIJAH WESTBROOK 

JUNE 27, 2023

 

NEW YORK - Congestion pricing is set to become a reality for drivers coming into Manhattan's Central Business District.

 

The Federal Highway Administration has cleared the way for the city to implement the controversial plan.

 

This federal approval was the final hurdle in allowing the MTA to move ahead with rolling out congestion pricing. This means drivers will be charged a fee when they go below 60th Street or enter what's called the Central Business District.

The MTA hasn't set a fee scale yet, but a report it released last summer shows one proposal under review would charge $23 during rush hours and $17 for off-peak hours.

 

more:
https://apple.news/A6xSykLW7Tr-7SnVTMKgrIA

I saw this article about walking as a mode of transportation, and was particularly intrigued by this graph.

https://www.planetizen.com/blogs/124359-fair-share-walking

 

So even in the most "walkable" western countries, people only walk for about 20% of their trips.  That should be a goal for improving walkability in the US.

This also suggests that we ought to be specifically allocating transportation dollars to walkability improvements.

 

Overall I recommend that article for its collection of other articles about infrastructure and walking, and its cost estimates for maintaining a pedestrian network.

 

 

 

82% of voters don’t believe highway expansions are the best solution for reducing congestion.

https://www.theurbanist.org/2023/06/29/americans-are-ready-to-move-on-from-highway-expansion/

 

“We’re repeatedly told by leaders on Capitol Hill that requiring states to prioritize maintenance first is just too controversial,” said Beth Osborne, director of Transportation for America. “But this survey shows yet again that there’s no controversy among the people they serve — they’re beyond ready to retire the last generation’s playbook when it comes to improving mobility and getting them where they need to go.”

 

^I suspect the "controversy" referenced above is coming from highway lobbyists, not the folks back home in their districts.

Maybe back in the '50s and '60s the people wanted expansion more.

3 hours ago, gildone said:

82% of voters don’t believe highway expansions are the best solution for reducing congestion.

https://www.theurbanist.org/2023/06/29/americans-are-ready-to-move-on-from-highway-expansion/

 

“We’re repeatedly told by leaders on Capitol Hill that requiring states to prioritize maintenance first is just too controversial,” said Beth Osborne, director of Transportation for America. “But this survey shows yet again that there’s no controversy among the people they serve — they’re beyond ready to retire the last generation’s playbook when it comes to improving mobility and getting them where they need to go.”

 

^I suspect the "controversy" referenced above is coming from highway lobbyists, not the folks back home in their districts.

I'd take those results with a MASSIVE grain of salt, if not just discount them entirely. Smart Growth America funded the poll, and looks to be pretty explicitly urbanist in their outlook. That means this is basically the equivalent of a party poll, party polls (when released anyway) generally put the candidate in a very good light (or in this case issue). I wouldn't assume this survey is an accurate representation of attitudes in the United States, maybe things are moving in the right direction though.  

15 hours ago, Ethan said:

I'd take those results with a MASSIVE grain of salt, if not just discount them entirely. Smart Growth America funded the poll, and looks to be pretty explicitly urbanist in their outlook. That means this is basically the equivalent of a party poll, party polls (when released anyway) generally put the candidate in a very good light (or in this case issue). I wouldn't assume this survey is an accurate representation of attitudes in the United States, maybe things are moving in the right direction though.  

Not saying it isn't possible, but, the only way to say thay with any certainty is to dig into the specific poll questions and point out where you think it's a problem. 

Edited July 6, 20231 yr by gildone

31 minutes ago, gildone said:

Not saying it isn't possible, but, the only way to say thay with any certainty is to dig into the specific poll questions and point out where you think it's a problem. 

We could dig into that. I downloaded the study before I commented, but I really don't think it's worth it. It's an online poll with about 2,000 respondents. I didn't read into how they gathered respondents. I'm just not particularly concerned because we don't know how many polls they didn't release (they being the commissioner of the poll or the executer). Again, the analogy to party polls applies. Amazingly polls funded by a candidate always make that candidate look good. 

Pete for President!

 

 

I don't know what European city this is, but what a great solution for tram riders to take their bicycles with them:

A great new podcast about re-thinking transportation:  Freeway Exit

 

 

https://www.kpbs.org/podcasts/freeway-exit

Edited October 5, 20231 yr by gildone
Add graphic

U.S. Travel Association study:  $71 billion in economic losses from trips not taken due to delays and other problems in our aviation system:

https://www.ustravel.org/press/dmv-experience-leading-27-million-skipped-trips-71-billion-lost-travel-spend

 

One thing stood out to me about this study: Like most of the rest of the country, they confine their thinking about solutions within the system as it exists.  The most effective thing we can do to make the aviation system work better is to have another travel choice:  fast, frequent, modern passenger trains. 

 

I'd like to know how many more deferred trips there are beacuse people don't want to make the drive. I know my wife and I would take more weekend trips to a lot of places if we didn't have to drive.