Total Range for the Prime?

I

I did forget about the Michigan EV fees. From some quick research, it looks like a $30 annual registration fee increase and a $17 annual “gasoline fee” both assessed when you renew your registration. Since Michigan registration fees are based on value and our Primes are pretty reasonably priced compared to most SUVs, I’ll bet they pay more than us still, not counting all the gas tax they will pay. When I get back from a trip I’ll compare the fees for my wife’s Audi Q5 TDI and my Prime.

 

Oklahoma recently enacted a $30 annual registration fee on EV's, but a legal challenge was successful and killed it.

 

I’m pretty sure I’ve read that Oregon has increased the vehicle registration fee for EVs, however it (fee) has been delayed two(?) years. The same legislation provided a $1500 tax break. Not sure how this affects cars like the Prime.

I’ll have to check into this next February when I’ll be looking for something (Prime?) to replace my Fiat 500e.

 

Here we are trying to do the right thing and help save the planet and they want to charge us more.

 

Why should we get free access to the roads just because we're being energy efficient?

 

and don't forget the free electricity

 

That is what I yell at pedestrians and bicyclists.

 

Yep, some of us in Portland, Oregon think bicyclists should pay. This city has actually made several four lane roads into two traffic lanes (one lane repurposed as a center turn lane, and the forth lane became a bike line).

 

If it were up to those categories, the roads would last forever.

One semi reportedly (page 23) causes as much road damage as 9,600 cars.

Going the other way, it would probably take millions of bicycles to cause as much damage as one semi.

 

Uh oh, my comment was meant to be taken tongue in cheek.

Portland has the right idea -- kick the cars to the kerb. The city is slowly learning that cars and bicycles have to be completely separate to really promote bicycle use.

 

Cars don't destroy roads, heavy trucks do the damage. So tax them and let the costs flow into the price of goods. The sooner we stop externalizing costs, the sooner society will act rationally. Local goods and trains come to mind, not to mention efficiency

 

There are tons and tons of roads built that trucks aren't even allowed on. In fact, most residential and local collection roads are like that.

In addition, those less-trafficked roads don't usually "wear out" like the highways do from fatigue, but rather wear out from exposure to the elements - UV, water, freeze-thaw cycles, etc.

Why should trucks pay for the roads they aren't even allowed to use when the roads are there for car traffic?

It's the high-truck-traffic highways that are primarily damaged by heavy truck traffic, not all roads.

 

When the trucks are paying their damage dues, I'll be happy to discuss the road that passes by my home.

 

Why does this have to be serial?

And don't forget, that's just road damage due to fatigue. There's the cost of building the roads in the first place just for access (for which we all benefit) and don't forget that any cost paid for by trucking is going to be reflected in your costs of products at the store. In other words, you're going to pay for it either way. The big cost is that more traffic goes by truck that should - some more should go by train. But then again, the rail system is fully-utilized so you'd have to build out more rail, which is expensive too and cars don't benefit from that investment since we can't drive on rails.

 

Time and weather also destroy roads.

Trucks don't cause the bulk of traffic congestion. Cars do. If our road system was built solely for trucks, then nearly every multi-lane highway and interstate and even city arterial could be reduced to a single lane each way. And most residential streets could be reduced to gravel footpaths.