This issue is kinda funny. When I owned an electric vehicle and read the EV lists, there were lots of folks all huffy about the hybrid drivers who were driving their hydrocarbon spewing gas cars in the HOV lanes with no passengers. Now that I'm converting to a hybrid driver it sounds like a good idea to let them in the HOV lane I suppose it all depends on where you sit. I'm sure the carpool folks who get 4 people into cars would hate hybrids or ZEVs in the carpool lane. My gut tells me that it's best to use the HOV lane only for things that alleviate traffic congestion, and in that respect a hybrid is no better than any other car. Sure owning the hybrid means we're helping the environment, but do we also want to allow people who own solar panels on their house in the HOV lane for the same reason? What about people who own lots of trees (which filter our air and help produce oxygen)? Maybe we should give people a single use HOV pass every time they take the train instead of driving? Perhaps people who don't own cars should be allowed an HOV pass whenever they ride with someone else. Heck, maybe people whose huge car registration fees and taxes paid on their $60k hummers which are funding the HOV lanes should be allowed to drive there The point is there are all sorts of "good" activities that could be subsidized by the HOV lane reward, and driving a hybrid isn't inherently any better than the others. Actually since the hybrids don't emit any fumes while stuck in traffic, it might be environmentally better to let the old cars that just barely pass smog check use the HOV lanes so they don't sit around spewing their fumes.
I fail to see the argument about EV's not spewing HC's (or more accurately CO2 and other gasses) - it just happens at a much different portion of the chain - the power plant. Unless you're generating your own power via solar or wind, the pollution is still happening - just at a more remote (hopefully) location.
Hydrogen production creates more pollution Hydrogen production makes more pollution than making gasoline as they use natural gas to do it. This is dumber than the bag the hammers came in. Opps, change that to, these politicians are dumber than the bag the hammers came in.
I agree with htmlspinnr. The laws of themodynamics seem to be inviolable, even for hybrids. The only potential air quality advantage that electrics have is that stationary polluters can have heavier scrubbers etc to clean emissions. Autos have a harder time doing that. Also, you have to figure that power plants are only about 40% efficient to start with, then there is the loss in high tension lines, the loss in stepping the voltage down and the losses in the charging systems for the battery. Don't know what the actual energy efficiency is on electric cars charged by non-renewables, but it can't be good. Nevertheless, reducing consumption of non-renewable energy sources only makes good economic sense. No one is denying that non-renewables are in fact non-renwables. The only thing that is argued about is how fast we are depleting them and how much of what is "left" is economically or physically recoverable. If oil companies like Royal Dutch Shell keep coming out and saying "oops, we goofed, we overestimated reserves by 20%" we may find that we are running out even sooner. Good new book on the subject is "The Party's Over" by Richard Heinberg. It's a wake up call!
And that CAN needs to be in caps. Bush's latest policies make it even easier for them to continue to run dirty. We get plenty of acid rain from dirty plants in the midwest. I propose regulations that state the stacks can be no higher than 50 feet. Then the locals will get on them to clean up
Well, up here they allow motorcycles to use the HOV lanes - they take up a "car's worth" of space on the road, so I don't know that they're any more efficient than other vehicles. It's an interesting distinction on the "allowed vehicles" list though. A fully electric car is allowed in with only one occupant, as are some natural gas conversions. However, as another poster correctly mentioned, there are energy and pollution costs associated with generating energy to power electric cars, and in refining/processing natural gas, so the line is very, very fine. Dave
The California issue is really intriguing. As much as I would love the HOV benefits of a Prius, I can understand Bob's comments below. Congestion is a major driver of these programs. As hybrids become more common, I am quite certain that these perks and incentives will disappear - as they should. But for now, it serves a great purpose in giving people pause before buying a vehicle. That in itself can be great. For those of you in Florida, HOV lanes are open to Prius drivers as long as they complete form HSMV 83027 and obtain a decal for your rear window. This was the result of legislation passed in July of 2003. More information and a list of other qualifying vehicles is at http://www.hsmv.state.fl.us/html/titlinf.html. The form itself is at http://www3.hsmv.state.fl.us/Intranet/dmv/...s/BTR/83027.pdf More information on the law and procedure can be found at http://casey.hsmv.state.fl.us/Intranet/dmv...TR/RS/RS-51.pdf
I believe the reasoning behind that is that a motorcycle with one person is "at capacity". The point is to put as many people into the vehicle as will fit in order to reduce congestion. Some HOV lanes require at least two people, others require three. The Honda Insight and old EV1 could only carry two people, as is true with roadsters like the Miata and Boxter. That being said, when I see an HOV lane at drive time in LA - it's rarely going faster than the rest of the traffic. So I can see the reason for trying to make it more exclusive.
I must say that I find it ludicrous that Hybrids aren't allowed to use the HOV lanes considering that the 3 main objectives of the HOV lanes are conserving oil, reducing emissions, and reduction of traffic congestion Clearly the Hybrids meet 2 of the 3 goals where a lot of the vehicles currently using the HOV lanes at best meet only one. Everyday I see SUVs with 2 people in them and wonder where’s the logic in allowing them in the HOV lanes. They easily emit twice the emissions and use twice the gas of a normal car (let alone a Hybrid) and even though they meet 1 of the criteria (reduce traffic congestion) they definitely do not meet the other two. But without a doubt the most preposterous thing is with the way the law currently stands in California people with small children are allowed to use the HOV lanes. These don’t meet any of the 3 objectives. There is no way that a small child is going to be driving themselves so how is this remotely considered efficient use of the HOV lanes.
Ultimately the number one reason for HOV lanes is to alleviate traffic congestion. The environmental reasons are also there, but are considered secondary to most governments. That's why Hybrid's in the HOV lanes are so contriversial. The biggest concern I've heard of is that there will be so many hybrid vehicles coming out over the next few years that it would flood the HOV lanes. The easy fix for that obviously is to limit access to cars that are hybrid and meet certain MPG standards.
Come to Northern Virginia. You can use the HOV3 lanes from I95 into D.C. with your Prius (or other hybrid). Of course the weather sucks and the rest of the traffic is the worst in the nation - and you might have to work for george Bush but otherwise it's quite fun!
That is what CA proposed to the federal government. http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=co...que&newsid=4293
