HOV Commuter Hybrid Hostility

I say "Go For It!" The truth of the matter is that HOV exclusions for hybrids are probably a short term thing. There are other posts on this board about the topic, and many people share the belief that High Occupancy doesn't apply to Prii. But the reason legislatures are doing what they are doing vis a vis Hybird HOV tags/decals is to incent good stewardship of environmental resources and encourage the purchase of vehicles with lower emissions.

So take advantage of it while you can. When the number of hybrids starts to take off, I'm sure that the original intent of HOV will return. In the mean time, make a statement.

As an aside, I've lived in No. Va. (Fairfax) and would have loved to have a Prius simply for the ability to take I-66 downtown at rush hour. I live in south Florida now, have an HOV sticker, and truthfully don't even need it that much!

 

here on the west coast of Canada they advertise the hov's as the Green Lane ya a Expidation or Suburban with 2 people in it is as green as a Prius. Not in a donkey year and ya the Looser who don't have a car and want you to give them a free ride, ya I'd probably drive by them and spray them with mace. I might be green but I ain't frendly, at least not to loosers who want something for nothing.

 

I think those that live in this area (from NoVA too) need to worry more about those single occupancy non-hybrid cars and trucks using the HOV. They need to realize that it would take 10 2004 Prius' to equal the emissions of NOx for just one car.

I, too, think it'll be a short term thing in this area, just because those without will complain until something changes - hopefully by then, so many cars will be hybrids, they'll shut up before it's too late!

-m.

 

If the real purpose of those lanes is to reduce emissions, then Prius should be allowed. However, if the real purpose is to reduce traffic, then they should not. Air pollution is a big problem, but so is traffic congestion on overcrowded freeways.

 

The reason HOV was created back in the 70s mind was for clean air purposes hence that is why Hybrids are welcome in HOV. The slugs will get over it, and with 50 miles of HOV and 4 hrs of HOV prvilege it really doesn't matter. It will be voted on again in 2006, but with so many people buying hybrids its hard for Richmond to change the rules. The slugs are typically jealous and would not drive themselves to work anyway, because it is not free. A free ride is a free ride. Believe me they don't care about the environment, the hybrids don't cause traffic, it's people moving farther out that causes traffic. So don't worry about the smirks, they have the right to buy a hybrid too, but they wont because it aint free.
Smile, wave and get to work happy.

 

I am in the DC Metro area and I have seen more people disobey the HOV resrictions then follow them. People who complain about the Prius are the same ones that complain about motorcyclist. I lucky will have both once i get the prius. The idea for HOV is to reward people who are causing less traffic. But it also should reward people who are polluting less.

 

This thread prompted me to review the DMV specifics for California, and of course it's done nothing but get me frustrated. Apparently, prior to 1/1/04, ILEV (inherently low) and ULEV (ultra-low) could use the HOV lanes after getting the $8 clean machine sticker. After 1/1/04, only ILEV and SULEV (super-ultra-low) can use the HOV lanes. Now, the '04 Prius states right on the window sticker that it's ILEV/ULEV/SULEV blah blah so there shouldn't be a problem. It's 100% compliant with the California Vehicle Code (found on the government website). However, some moron at DMV decided to AMEND the letter of the law and specifically add to the DMV rules that "hybrids need not apply". There's nothing that doesn't meet the legal language of the CVC, but we're still excluded. If I had a good attorney (and could afford one), I'd love to put it to the test and see who wins in court....

 

As a follow-up, I sauntered over to our local DMV during lunch and asked the tough questions about our hybrid exclusion from HOV usage. They gave me the telephone number for the ARB Motor Vehicle Information hotline (800) 242-4450. The woman at that office pointed me toward their website and a specific FAQ about the Prius:
www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/carpool/faq.htm
She also said that former Gov. Davis started a bill in California to allow hybrids to be added to the list of qualified vehicles. A determination has not been made yet. Somehow I have the feeling that a Governator who owns 7 Hummer-guzzlers isn't going to be too much in a rush to push this bill through...

 

and the next link shows that some compressed-natural-gas SEVEN LITER engined vehicles are ok in the HOV lanes... http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/carpool/carpo...ol.htm#vehicles

i'd suggest a letter or ten to "Assemblyman Jim Cunneen" to consider a rewrite of his bill....... [email protected]

ps.... i've been writing about the stupidity of many of the HOV lanes for several years... see http://www.plusaf.com/soapbox/carpool.htm for example...

but the issue is really one of the rationale behind the LAWs. if it's to get CARS off the road by putting multiple DRIVERS in one car, so be it, and LEVs can keep to the right lanes. (phooey!). if there's any part of the rationale that includes "fewer cars = less pollution", virtually all cars with high mileage (say, 40+ EPA) or some low number of grams per mile of emissions, SHOULD be allowed.

this is what happens when the lawyers write the laws. they don't tend to be too good at math and science.....

Mike Honda is my State Representative, and he and Cunneen both have rather "green" voting records, so this might work... other CA folks... join in!

here's a copy of what i just emailed to Cunneen, with a copy to Honda. Mike Honda, that is! this could get confusing....
=================
i would like to know if you would consider a modification to legislation that regulates the use of hybrid automobiles in HOV lanes.

while for some, this is a "religious" issue, my thoughts on the subject are that, if HOV lanes are intended to reduce the number of CARS on the highways, then the ONLY cars that should be in the HOV lanes are cars with MORE THAN ONE LICENSED DRIVER in them. i.e., that having more than one licensed driver in the car is the cause that effects "one less car on the road."

if the HOV lanes are also intended to reduce pollution emitted by automobiles, it would seem rational to me to look at all vehicles, ranked by the amount of pollution they emit per mile, and decide on a cutoff number, above which they can be in the HOV lane with ANY number of passengers or drivers in the vehicle, and below which they may only use the HOV lanes if they have more than one licensed driver on board.

if this logic appeals to you, i would respectfully ask you to consider revisions to laws like AB71.


thank you for considering this input, and i would like to know your feelings on the subject.


Alan Falk
+af
www.plusaf.com
mailto[email protected]

cc: [email protected] , my representative.
--------------------------------------
Filtered by Norton Antivirus.
--------------------------------------
============================

 

HOT lanes?

 

HOT - High Occupancy Toll

For-Profit HOV Lanes

 

Okay, folks, here's the Solution To Everything ™: Horses. Sure, we would not get there as fast, but we could produce all their fuel here at home (hay and oats) and they make good pets. They also produce the fertilizer needed to grow their fuel, so we would not need petro-chemical fertilizers.

To facilitate and encourage this conversion, I propose that we eliminate the HOV lanes, and designate those lanes as horse lanes instead.

 

NoVa commuters' survival guide:

- On perfect weather days, take motorcycle and HOV-1
- All others, take the Prius and HOV-1

Must admit...few things better than stealth mode while watching exhaust plumes and trying for 50 mpg/tank.

 

Plusaf: Just looked through your posted page, and then a quick look around the NJ-DMV site. NJ has not repealed HOV lanes, though they have time restrictions for when they are in force (eg. 3 hours in morning for TPK-N, evening for TPK-S).

As for HOT, its partly a misnomer. The point was to have a lane that anyone could pay extra to use when it was needed (I understand they also have the degrading term 'Lexus Lanes' due to that). I'm a bit nervous about the concept, but only because I've not seen it firsthand.

 

thanks for the comment, T.S.K.... i needed to update that page, anyway...
a google of "new jersey hov lanes" turned up some interesting stuff, though.......