Skip to main content

From fuel taxes to 'pay as you drive'

The US has started trials for distance-based charging mechanisms aimed at ultimately replacing the gasoline tax.

Motorists in several US cities are being recruited to try out a new mileage-based road user charge system. The Public Policy Center of the University of Iowa is leading the trial. This is very good news (although I realise this trial is only the first step in a very long process with no gurantee of political success).

Smart folks like Bern Grush and Robin Chase have been calling for usage-based pricing for a long time and pointing out that motor fuel taxes are gradually failing us. The Netherlands, Singapore and the UK apparently have plans for distance-based charging too. Germany and Switzerland already charge heavy vehicles based on distance and weight.

There are spin-off opportunities here. I hope they don't get missed!

It would be natural for people to be suspicious about having 'extras' that piggy-back on a new user charging system. But I think it would be a great pity if the mechanisms chosen for mileage-based user charging cannot exploit other important spin-offs as well, while still protecting privacy.

Exploiting all of the spin-offs could amplify the benefits and make "Pay as you drive" (PAYD) charging more cost-effective.

Any distance-based charging mechanism should be flexible enough to ALSO:
  • allow for performance-based parking pricing and handle per-minute parking pricing (see Grush)

  • help with PAYD Insurance applications

  • allow registration fees or 'road taxes' to be turned into PAYD fees

  • charge differentially for driving at different times and different places (and hence provide for congestion pricing)

  • provide for reliable measurement of total vehicle mileage, so that distance-driven can become a reliable part of vehicle depreciation calculations and reduce odometer fraud in the used vehicle market

  • even allow time-of-purchase taxes to be 'variabilised' if necessary (as I argued in a paper - see here for publisher site and here for pdf preprint - this would allow such fees to send their usual signal to vehicle buyers but would prevent them adding to fixed costs by turning them into a variable cost).

If I am not mistaken, there are technologies already out there (ask Bern Grush and Robin Chase) that could do these things AND still ensure privacy. The Iowa system may also have these features, but I am not sure. Can anyone confirm?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Podcasts on urban mobility and urban issues: a LONG list

Below is my increasingly long list of podcasts on urban mobility and/or urban issues. 

If you are not yet a regular podcast listener, you need to download a podcast-listening app to your phone, tablet or desktop and subscribe (it's free) to the podcasts that interest you.

UPDATE 1: This list has many podcasts but obviously I hope you will try mine! They are Reinventing Transport and Reinventing Parking.

UPDATE 2: I have added FOURTY ONE more since this was first published. Thanks to everyone who has sent tips.

Transport-based City Types and their Trajectories

I want to help you get perspective on your city and its transport system with the help of simple city types based on their dominant transport modes, such as Walking Cities, Transit Cities, Bus Cities, Motorcycle Cities and Car Cities.

This way of thinking about cities is a heuristic (an imperfect mental model or technique that is nevertheless good enough to be helpful). And it obviously is imperfect. For example, real cities often have various modes of transport, and modern cities are really all some kind of hybrid city type.

But it is still useful, especially if we add the idea of a Traffic Saturated City, which is a very different beast from a Car City. It is important for change-makers in Traffic Saturated Cities to be aware they are not in automobile dependent cities yet.

Options for digesting this: 
Read the brief article below and study the diagrams. They complement the podcast. For more depth, LISTEN to the 37 minute audio with the player above. A full transcript of the podcast is…

Parking: What's Wrong and How to Fix It

We should stop planning parking the way we plan toilets. I began with that odd (but true) statement to get your attention, obviously. But I am also serious.

Many people think parking policy is boring, which is unfortunate, because boring or not, parking is important.

If you care about cities and urban mobility, you really need to pay some attention to parking.

Most local governments really do plan parking the same way they plan toilets (using minimum parking/toilet requirements) and it is disastrous. More on that below.

Municipalities do this because of another mistake - treating on-street parking as a public good (and therefore failing to manage it properly). Please take note: parking in cities is generally NOT a public good.

These two mistakes cause huge problems:
1. on-street parking problems, which worsen many other mobility and street problems, and  2. a slow-motion disaster of increasingly excessive (but under-used) off-street parking supply which fuels car dependence.

It's …