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

Here is my list of podcasts on urban mobility and urban issues. 

Please use the comments to send tips or corrections.

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 to the podcasts that interest you (it's free).

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 THREE more since this was first published.

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…

Ending parking minimums - why, where, who, how

Parking minimums are under siege and it's a very good thing. 

Most buildings in most cities and towns across the globe are required by law to provide plentiful parking.

But parking minimums are a huge mistake.


Click here to learn how to subscribe to the podcast.

These parking minimums are put in place for understandable but muddle-headed reasons.

Parking minimums (also called minimum parking requirements or norms or standards) do not in fact solve the on-street parking problems they are supposed to solve.

Instead, they cause immense harm by worsening car dependence, hindering infill development, undermining walkable neighborhoods, blocking transit-oriented development, and by making real-estate, including housing, less financially viable and less affordable.

Abolishing parking minimums is not a panacea. By itself, it doesn't necessarily reduce the parking that developers provide in car-dependent locations.

But, among its many benefits, eliminating minimums does enable low-parkin…