Daily Gas Guzzler Tax/Congestion Charges in London

[genericuser]

It's the mayor of London in one corner and Porsche, the maker of thoroughbred sports cars, in the other.
In the green trunks, Mayor Ken Livingstone has decreed that a $50 daily tax shall be levied against all gas-guzzling, emission-spewing vehicles that drive through his city beginning in October. His logic says that it will fight global warming, and the money raised will help implement a Paris-style bicycle plan for the city. Re-election is around the corner, so this initiative is imperative to his tenure.
In the black trunks, Andy Goss, the Managing Director of Porsche Cars GB, rejects the tax as unjust. The automaker claims it is a disproportionate fee that will have a very limited effect on CO2 emissions. Its plan is to write Livingstone a letter requesting that he reconsider the proposal, and if nothing happens after 14 days, take the matter to the courts, which could throw out Livingstone's tax altogether.

And the winner is... neither side. Both are unable to deliver a knock out punch, so the winner will likely be chosen by decision.

-Courtesy of Autoblog

 

[genericuser]

That was the article from Autoblog this afternoon. Am I the only one who wouldn't mind seeing a similar plan put in place in America's big cities?

Congestion charges in NYC, Chicago ETC would discourage motor traffic, and increase healthier modes of transportation such as public transit and bikes/walking.

Furthermore the congestion charge funds could be used to pay for mass transit upgrades and infrastructure upgrades. I can't be the only one who thinks this is worth looking into.

 

[BlackCherry06]

The need for something like this is obvious, but it's viability in certain cities can definitely be called into question. I don't know many people who live close enough to their jobs to ride a bike or walk. I'd actually like to ride my bike on nice days, as I only live 5 miles from my office. There's just no way for me to get here without being killed. No bikeway is going to save me from having to cross a major highway and several busy 6-lane roads unless they plan to build hundreds of pedestrian bridges all over the metroplex.

His intentions are good, but his execution is terrible. Singling out performance car owners will never fly. If they'd like to impose a more meaninful tax, they should nail the ones who's aging cars are spewing more smoke in a few blocks than a 911 spews all day.

 

[Flash5]

I think its kinda touchy. Yes it would heavily influence people into getting smaller cars or at least more efficient ones. But some people need larger cars and trucks for various reasons. Plus when I get older I would like to have a nice car, like a Porsche, and I doubt it will be great on gas, and this tax would piss me the hell off. So im not really with this idea.

 

[coolmazda5]

His intentions are good, but his execution is terrible. Singling out performance car owners will never fly. If they'd like to impose a more meaninful tax, they should nail the ones who's aging cars are spewing more smoke in a few blocks than a 911 spews all day.

Good point, in places like Mexico City 3 things have been done:

• Gas is higher quality than from the rest of the Country (read less pollutants). It is the same price as the rest of the Country, but somehow is subsidized. Now, Why it is not used in the rest of the Country if it pollutes less? Well is not economically affordable to do it nationwide
• There is a system called "Hoy no Circula". One day of the week, depending of the last number of your license plate, your car cannot be driven
• Cars 10 year old or older no longer pass the bi-yearly pollution tests so they cannot be sold in Mexico City (I think is 10 years)

As usual, there is always a down-side:

• People who can afford 2 cars buy a relatively old one for when the primary car cannot be driven
• For the "Hoy No Circula" there are some new cars exempted as their pollution is much less (kind of the Honda ULEVs)

Although it will never be perfect, I would go with seanmcsean, there are some places where it can be done and is a good start. Just go to places like Berlin or Helsinki: cars, gas and car related taxes are so expensive that owning/driving a car is a real luxury, so public transportation is much more effective.

 

[mikeyb]

I say bring it on. Of course it will not really effect me.

 

[genericuser]

I'm just wondering why it isn't done over here in NYC. They have the best public transit.. You don't even need to drive in that city.

This country needs better public transit.. This would be a kick in the ass to get things headed in the right direction!

I'd take a bus or rideshare to work if I could, but I live in such an isolated area that it doesn't seem possible.

 

[noclue119]

NYC is the only city that can do this. because all other cities in the us are too big and spread out for this to happen

That was the article from Autoblog this afternoon. Am I the only one who wouldn't mind seeing a similar plan put in place in America's big cities?

Congestion charges in NYC, Chicago ETC would discourage motor traffic, and increase healthier modes of transportation such as public transit and bikes/walking.

Furthermore the congestion charge funds could be used to pay for mass transit upgrades and infrastructure upgrades. I can't be the only one who thinks this is worth looking into.

 

[downtube]

I say bring it over here. While they're at it quadruple the tax on gasoline, at least.