As more drivers turn to zero-emissions vehicles, which don't have to pay anything at the pump, California's gas tax could soon be a thing of the past. But it would be replaced by something else.
Something needs to change. When these massive EVs (Hummers, cybertrucks, etc…) are worse for the environment and roads than other vehicles they should be paying proportionally to the damage they cause.
It’s crazy to me that somehow we’re transitioning to EV but at the same time have found a way to make them more dangerous.
The EVs are heavier, which causes more road wear than a similarly sized ICE and they will also produce more tire wear pollution for the same reason. Overall, they’d still be better than the ICE comparison for the environment due to no tail pipe emissions but a smaller EV would obviously be better.
This is also ignoring the environmental damage caused by mining the resources for the batteries, as well as ignoring that an old ICE engine will always be better for the environment than a new ICE or EV car. There is no such thing as a new car that is good for the environment… it’s all green washing.
Unless you literally destroy the old ice vehicle to replace it with a new ev, the new ev is a net improvement for the environment.
But since it enters the used car market, this is not the case. The replaced ice vehicle is likely pushing an older more polluting ice vehicle out of the system.
Yes, any powered vehicles are bad for the environment. With that said, studies have shown that, even considering mining resources for batteries, an EV is much less detrimental for the environment that a similar ICE vehicle.
I hear you…. My main point is that new things are never as green as old things, but I have recently heard or read articles suggesting the impact of mining for metal and batteries is not fully accounted for in the studies….
Electricity produced by solar panels is not taxed.
Most electricity is not used by EVs so there is no correlation to road maintenance. It’s an inappropriate way to fund roads. It would make more sense to tax tires.
An electricity tax could be used to convince people to self generate their electricity but utility monopolies would lobby hard against it but it will never solve road funding.
Yeah, but road wear is exponential. Driving a vehicle with twice the weight uses four times the public resources, but I don’t think you want to tax electricity that high.
I’m of the opinion that large heavy vehicles should pay more to use the roads than smaller light vehicles. Beyond the $20 to charge a large EV SUV. How much road tax comes from electricity? Pay for what you use ya know?
Something needs to change. When these massive EVs (Hummers, cybertrucks, etc…) are worse for the environment and roads than other vehicles they should be paying proportionally to the damage they cause.
It’s crazy to me that somehow we’re transitioning to EV but at the same time have found a way to make them more dangerous.
Which means the trucking industry should be paying a lot more.
Are large EVs actually worse for the environment compared to an equivalent sized ICE vehicle? I find that hard to believe.
Tires on EVs wear down faster than ICE vehicles.
The EU has regulations on tires to control pollution.
Meanwhile, the is dismantling the EPA…
The EVs are heavier, which causes more road wear than a similarly sized ICE and they will also produce more tire wear pollution for the same reason. Overall, they’d still be better than the ICE comparison for the environment due to no tail pipe emissions but a smaller EV would obviously be better.
This is also ignoring the environmental damage caused by mining the resources for the batteries, as well as ignoring that an old ICE engine will always be better for the environment than a new ICE or EV car. There is no such thing as a new car that is good for the environment… it’s all green washing.
Sunk cost fallacy.
Unless you literally destroy the old ice vehicle to replace it with a new ev, the new ev is a net improvement for the environment.
But since it enters the used car market, this is not the case. The replaced ice vehicle is likely pushing an older more polluting ice vehicle out of the system.
Yes, any powered vehicles are bad for the environment. With that said, studies have shown that, even considering mining resources for batteries, an EV is much less detrimental for the environment that a similar ICE vehicle.
I hear you…. My main point is that new things are never as green as old things, but I have recently heard or read articles suggesting the impact of mining for metal and batteries is not fully accounted for in the studies….
I was mistaken with how much co2 they produce but here’s an article about it https://www.inverse.com/input/tech/gmc-hummer-ev-carbon-dioxide-emissions-electric-truck
Good news, electricity is already taxed. Driving larger EVs already costs more in taxes than driving smaller, more efficient EVs.
Electricity produced by solar panels is not taxed.
Most electricity is not used by EVs so there is no correlation to road maintenance. It’s an inappropriate way to fund roads. It would make more sense to tax tires.
An electricity tax could be used to convince people to self generate their electricity but utility monopolies would lobby hard against it but it will never solve road funding.
Yeah, but road wear is exponential. Driving a vehicle with twice the weight uses four times the public resources, but I don’t think you want to tax electricity that high.
I’m of the opinion that large heavy vehicles should pay more to use the roads than smaller light vehicles. Beyond the $20 to charge a large EV SUV. How much road tax comes from electricity? Pay for what you use ya know?