Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Hybrids and HOV Lanes
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
That last link is about federal funds for "Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement" and how they are are going to be apportioned.
Seems to me the idea is to fund projects that reduce congestion by getting vehicles off the road when possible.
Putting single occupant vehicles in the HOV lane seems a bit counterintuitive to me.
Indulge me in a bit of daydreaming...
What's a reasonable number for the percentage of vehicles that are hybrids that are on the road? I saw a JD Powers estimate that hybirds will be about 1.3% of new vehicle sales this year. Great. Let's call it 2%. i know every little bit helps, but this wouldn't even be replacing 2% of the vehicles that are already using the HOV lanes, this would be adding vehicles to the HOV lane that aren't there now.
Now in Greater Commuterland, we have a hypothetical commuter population and a given set of roads. The roads are very crowded and some people carpool to avoid the congestion and get to work faster, etc. Oh and by the way, since the number of cars on the road is reduced a bit, emissions go down. All good. Now along come hybrids. Terrific idea. Some of the population is going to buy them, some aren't. Some of the commuting population is going to buy them as well. Hmmm... HOV lanes open up to single passenger vehicles if they are a hybrid. Well, that's interesting. Some of the people commuting are going to take advantage of this aren't they? After all, they can STILL use the HOV lane, but they don't have to pick up Joe and Marge and have a bit more freedom as to when and where they go. Trouble is, Joe and Marge still have to get to and from work, so that adds at least one car to the road. Hmm... more congestion isn't it? Longer commute times? Enough increase in emissions to offset any decrease because of the increased mileage of a hybrid? Perhaps :surprise:
The incentives of the HOV lane (less congestion, faster commutes) are there to get cars off the road if possible. Take the emotion of hybrids out of it. Why shouldn't I be able to fly solo in the HOV lane in my Sentra getting about 42 mpg highway?? Wouldn't THAT be an incentive for people to buy higher mileage/cleaner cars?
Darn... that would mean MORE cars on the road, wouldn't it? I KNEW there was a catch!
IMHO, of course.
There is no mystery about hybrids' impact on the carpool lanes, known as HOV, or high-occupancy-vehicle, lanes. Introduced only five years ago, hybrids now account for at least 22 percent of rush-hour traffic on I-95's HOV lanes. That's even more than the 15 percent believed to be cheaters.
Whatever marginal environmental benefits are realized by encouraging hybrid sales on the promise of HOV access, at this point the policy may be doing more harm than good.
Washington Post
Those purchasing a hybrid after the July 1 deadline would be issued a distinctively different Clean Special Fuel plate and would not be permitted to use the HOV lanes during restricted hours unless they have two or more passengers.
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/032006/03122006/174263
Yes, of course . . . AND to reduce air pollution. An acquaintance of mine who works as an air particle researcher for the State of California says that the reduction of air pollution is one of the top reasons for HOV lanes. That's why we see so many statutes written to allow hybrid and alternative-fuel clean-emisison vehicles access to them. California has special issues regarding smog, and HOV lanes reduce the number of vehicles and congestion as well, but also reduce air pollution. At the federal level, and all across the country at the state level, many major policy documents that refer to this issue also refer to emissions reductions when referring to HOV lanes. The incentive is there and it is important.
The high gas mileage that you refer to does not necessarily achieve clean air emissions as do the hybrids and some alternative fuel vehicles. So your statement about high mpg's makes little sense as it relates to the purpose of achieving less congenstion and less pollution. I am surprised at your lack of logic on that.
Every little bit helps, and it's a shame the way some folks can never let solutions find there way into society becasue they are not perfect solutions. Instead they criticize to the point of making nothing happen at all. To these folks, no progress is better than some progress. Also, these same people are generally the ones that never want to be personally inconvenienced, even if it's for the good of all.
If hybrids are helpful at reducing air pollution, then they fulfill part of the reason for HOV lanes, and therefore deserve access. Thank goodness that legislators clearly understand this, in spite of those complaining folks that just don't get it.
BTW, I do enjoy and agree with many of your posts and viewpoints, but on this one, we apparently do not agree at all.
TagMan
If that is true, which it is not. Why did the states including CA have to wait for Congress to give approval to the states allowing hybrids into the High Occupancy Vehicle lanes?
CA held off for fear of losing Federal highway funds. It is only an ignorant attempt to push a flawed agenda.
Three Prii pollute more than one Camry with 3 people on board. The Prii also will use more gas. So it is a lose, lose situation. It discourages those wanting to follow the rules set out for HOV lanes and encourages those that greedily take up space allocated for car pooling and buses. I find it very selfish and counter productive. I fully understand the "road rage" directed at hybrids in the HOV lanes. It is no better than the guy in a car with a blow up doll circumventing the law.
You have no basis to say that. I've known this professional for over 25 years. Not only that, but you would be amazed at the true nature of "Caltrans", and their actual "inside" agenda.
It is no better than the guy in a car with a blow up doll circumventing the law.
The hybrid driver has not broken any laws, and has responded to incentives that are in place, whether or not you agree with them. The guy with the blow up doll is deliberately breaking the law. So, I'm sorry . . . there is a VERY BIG difference. Your comparison says a lot about your true nature, and is a pathetic insult to many law-abiding citizens with good ethical and moral character that simply believe that driving a hybrid vehicle is a good choice for saving energy and helping the air quality. Goodness gracious, they are not folks with blow up dolls. Pitiful comparison. I am therefore through with this conversation.
Game over.
I am sorry you are unable to face the truth. Drivers in VA were given the go ahead to BREAK Federal law by driving solo in the HOV lanes. And the game is far from over. The fight against hybrids in the HOV lanes has just begun.
HOV driver (High) ,
MidCow
P.S. - I have not seen a legislation or talk to change the name of the lanes to LEV
P.S.S. _ I think this is the bad predictor of things to come. The Gen II Prius will start to fail in mass and then in a few more years the Gen IIIs . They will die an ugly wreckful death!
Thats great info about your "one" acquaintance. If one of the big reasons HOV lanes is to be used for air pollution, then why would the they try to limit the number of hybrids on the road. Can you explain that with the new law below. It doesn't help your argument one bit. There is BETTER reason why HOV lanes was created and that is why they are limiting the number of hybrids on HOV lanes.
To take advantage of the HOV-use extension, you must purchase a hybrid and apply for a Clean Special Fuel license plate before July 1. These plates will cost the hybrid owner an extra $25.
Those purchasing a hybrid after the July 1 deadline would be issued a distinctively different Clean Special Fuel plate and would not be permitted to use the HOV lanes during restricted hours unless they have two or more passengers.
Of course, in our society of ever-growing political status, we can't leave anything alone. A few weeks ago, I noticed the requirements for I-66 have been dropped in some sections, and now motorcycles can use the HOV lanes.
NOW we add the politically-correct, "I love the Earth more than you do" hybrids. What is next? Handicapped plates in HOV lanes? Anyone who has voted in at least 3 out of the last 4 elections? Or maybe anyone who has contributed to the John Kerry campaign (2004 OR 2008 versions) or to the "Save the Rain Forest" fund? What if I have a hybrid that is half solar and half windmill powered?
Or, hey, how about this--GET BACK TO THE CONCEPT OF ONLY HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLES IN THE HOV LANES?
1. The carpool lane *is* the passing lane during carpool lane hours. Therefore, you MUST get the heck out of that lane unless you are *passing*. It doesn't matter what kind of car you drive, hyrid or not! End of story.
2. See point #1.
So many times, as I navigate LA freeways, I have observed three lanes jammed with vehicles and the HOV lane nearly empty. So let's see here, perhaps 95% of all vehicles in three lanes and around 5% in the fourth lane. If that one lane were open to all, wouldn't the distribution be more or less even? And for those who think there would be fewer cars on the road, I say WRONG.
So, allow the hybrids into the diamond lane. At least, it has the unintended effect of partially equalizing lane usage. Why not invite others in? How about friends and relatives of Prius owners?
Boo Hiss Hybrids in HOV only if they meet the lane occupancy rules and only if they don't hypermile drive like grammas and grampas.
Down with "Lane Equalization"
Normally the metro buses are slow but they still go the speed limit or so. It was somewhat dismaying to see a bus have to slow down behind a hybrid the other day.
LA is worse that Houston ,but just by the hair of my chinny chin chin. Both Houston and LA are bad commutes.
Shift On,
MidCow
1. He is a fancy man and deserves to be treated as such.
B. Just because the lane is designated for High Occupancy Vehicles doesn't mean it was meant for vehicles with High Occupancy, does it?
3. If the laws prevent cars from entering and exiting the HOV lane for miles at a stretch, how is it that traffic builds up to the point where it stops moving in this lane? If all the cars always kept moving, how could traffic ever come to a stop? My theory is that it is the same person every day causing this. I think this person is infested with thetans and needs help. But I'm not *really* sure.
D. People who drive under 70 MPH on any major highway should take the bus or stay home.
F. See number 2.
I beleive this matter is stettled and we can all move on now.
God Bless America and safe motoring to you and your families.
Among the lamest of reasons is that hybrid drivers tend to travel at 65 mph (correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the speed limit in all but farm country?). I laughed because it's not as if there weren't "slow" drivers (read not doing at least 80 mph) before hybrids made the scene.
My take is people are griping all over the place and coming up with pretty STUPID reasons for being mad about hybrids in the HOV lanes without addressing the real reason.
They're jealous. I'm getting 45+ mpg (city or highway, doesn't matter) as I cruise serenely down the road. Gas going up? Dang, that's going to cost me a few cents in a few weeks. I think some are mad because I'm laughing at them as they cough their way past me in their shiny 12 mpg dinosaurs. And they should be mad. Just not at those of us who got smart early.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it theoretically possible to get 150-200 MPG from an automobile on the highway? I mean these things are still using an internal combustion gas engine operating at maybe 20% efficiency. A highly optimized turbine running at a constant speed and power driving a generator could operate at upwards of 60% efficiency. And a completely electric drive train could eliminate the transmission entirely and even offer direct to the wheel power giving the possibility of unprecedented traction and handling control with individual power to each wheel being computer controlled.
And as for traffic on the freeway, the technology to create cruise controls that match the vehicle in front of you have been available for years. This would prevent accidents and improve throughput enormously. You wouldn't even need an HOV lane!
They are the ones most annoyed with the solo hybrid drivers and rightfully so.
If you were in a barfight and needed help. Who would you rather have by your side, a bunch of snizley Hybrid drivers or a bunch of SUV drivers? Food for thought.
I'm reminded of the the line from the great song by the Eagles "I'm a runnin' down the road trying to loosen my load". I don't think they meant to be offensive but the protests still continue!
Sure, we all want to wrap up this debate in a nice little box with tidy ribbon and a bow but THAT CANNOT HAPPEN.
Nobody (and I meand nobody) knows better than you when it comes to this, and the HOV lane is no exception. Far from it.
As always, please keep me post-it.
Yes, you are wrong. There are thousands of miles of Interstate that are posted 70-75 MPH. Which means the traffic moves 75-85 MPH. CA has HOV lanes in several of those Interstate highways. If you are in the way, or slowing traffic, you are a HAZARD. That applies to hybrids and non-hybrids. It was no big deal when a handful CNG cars were allowed in. The hybrids are causing gridlock in the HOV lanes. The negative being why go to the trouble of ride sharing if we don't get the full use of the HOV lanes. Getting 45 MPG should be reward enough for owning a hybrid. Laugh at the gas pump, don't block working people in the HOV lanes.
I am not aware of any Interstates with HOV lanes that have speed limits above 65 MPH. That is the maximum speed limit inside of built up areas, such as cities, where the HOV lanes are used. CA does have 70 MPH freeways, but only in the countryside. Arizona has 75 MPH (yea!) max, but the speed drops to 65 in town.
Ah, the "pure" hybrid. People have been claiming to have this perfected for quite some time, but no one has demonstrated such a vehicle. I believe that if it were easy, Toyota and others would have gone this route. That is not to say it cannot be done, but no one is doing it...
Even a small sedan is still around 3000 lbs. That takes a lot of electric motor power to propel, which in turn requires a lot of generator, which in turn requires a lot of gasoline to run an ICE. And always remember that the more electric motors, the more batteries, the more weight - which increases the demand on the electric motors. No free lunches, the energy has to come from somewhere!
You're probably right. Let's wait for Toyota to solve our problems. They certainly have our best interests at the forefront of their thinking. And if they don't, the politician certainly will make them.
However you're not understanding the physics of a car. Cruising at highway speeds the weight is not a significant factor. Friction of the tires and drive train, air resistance and lights and other elecrical accessories make up the workload. You only need 10-15 HP to keep a car moving. I still think 200 MPG on the highway and maybe 50 around town is very realistic.
I think you are part of the majority of hybrid owners that bought for the HOV privilege. That still does not make it fair to those that make the sacrifice to pick up fellow workers and use the HOV for what it was sold to the public for. I am glad you go with the flow. That cannot be said for all hybrid owners.
Welcome to the Forum....
Missing the point? Well the point is getting as much traffic as economically and safely from point A to B. The HOV is supposed to reduce congestion by substituting 2 or 3 cars with one. And as an extension, which is part of the controversy, to reduce fuel consumption by allowing cars that get roughly double the fuel efficiency to use HOV.
Buy my other point is that much more traffic could be carried if cars were better designed to travel closer together using modern technology and be made more efficient with existing technology that is kept from us for some reason. Perhaps the HOV lane should be reserved for cars that can safely tailgate using a cruise control that senses the distance to the car in front. Tickets for driving to slow would be a neccesity.
For god's sake we should be commuting to work in flying cars by now! I mean it is the 21st century! Where are the flying cars they promised us?
I think we are through with this discussion. I wish to have your comments removed.
Everyone just needs to STOP, "understand", and move on.
God Speed.
You need more than 15 HP to get that car up to speed, which is the problem.
Note that current hybrids already get ~50mpg in town...
An electric motor can maintain reasonable efficiency across a broad range of speed and torque requirements. And one of the reasons hybrids do so well around town is that they use the electric motors for braking which actually recharges the batteries using the motion of the car. You would still have that in a pure hybrid.
• All trucks, except pickups, over 1½ tons must remain in the right two lanes on all freeways with four or more lanes and must remain in the far right lane on freeways with three or less lanes. Said trucks are prohibited from using the HOV lanes at all times no matter how many people are on board.
• All HOV lanes are restricted to vehicles with two or more licensed drivers unless the freeway is posted for three or more. No exemption to the above may be given at any time for the type of vehicle or method of propulsion.
• An HOV (except crossing the double yellow line) or truck violation would result in a minimum $500 fine and one point on your record. Each additional violation within 36 months would add an additional $500. (Currently in CA an HOV violation will cost you $341 but you don’t get charged a point). Those who got caught crossing the double yellow to get into or out of the HOV lane would be hit with a starting fine of $1,000 with an additional $500 for each violation within 36 months.
What stood out for me was the two or more licensed drivers to use the HOV lane. Well I guess that means no more school buses and minivan moms (and dads) in the HOV lane. My feeling is that if this gets on the ballot it will win by a landslide.
Today's Wall Street Journal has an interesting article about how hybrid sales are slipping because people are finally getting out their calculators and doing the math. Henry Ford II said it well: "People will spend anything to think they are saving money."
Any idea how CHIPS would enforce the final bullet point?
With each succeeding visit to California since the HOV lanes were set up, I am getting better at avoiding accidental ingress onto the HOV lane. I must confess a few times I have wandered onto the HOV lane simply because I was not familiar with the lane configuration.
I do try and get off as quickly as possible. But sometimes I have to violate the law for a while or risk smacking into someone before I get off.
Presumably, the CHIPS officers give numb-brain out of staters a break, if in fact it appears the HOV transgression was the result of numb-brain out of staterness.
Why don't these people just be honest about it and issue special stickers or license plates that cost $5,000/year for the privilege of using the HOV lane. Call it a premium service and claim to use the revenues for education or health care or whatever drivel buys votes that week. Of course the revenues will somehow get lost in the bureaucracy along the way...
But those that can afford it can cruise the HOV lane and not waste all that money on the pseudo-hybrid crap.
And for crying out loud start drilling holes in Alaska so we don't have to worry about gas supplies. Do it before Canada figures out a way to sneak the oil out without us noticing.
There is not enough oil to allow us to stop worrying. On the other hand, the Canadians have more than they could ever use without having to steal what little we have.
The answer is since August 19, 2004.
I find it trully amazing that a couple of poeple who just joined Edmunds forums have all the answers to everything :surprise:
Oh well!
MidCow
"And for crying out loud start drilling holes in Alaska so we don't have to worry about gas supplies. Do it before Canada figures out a way to sneak the oil out without us noticing. "
Actually , you are somewhat misinformed about oil production, governmental regulations and the cost of recovery.
Hey there is more oil in Colorado that the US could use in the next couple of hundred years. Why aren't we drilling it? Because it costs to much.
But this discussion is about HOV lanes, not oil production. In case you don't understand HOV stands for High Occupancy Vehicles. Not Highdollar Owner Vehicles or Hybrid Owner Vehicles.
The purpose is to reduce the number of vehicles
using the roads. The signs that say carpools only say that becuase a SUV warriors taking their kids to soccer practice or dropping them off at daycare are not a carpool and are not allowed. They don't reduce the number of vehicles on the road!
Also what and why are Law Enforcement officials onduty or off allowed to use the HOV lanes ? Another perk, just like free donuts and half-priced meals?
If you wnat more information you might want to read other posts that are already in this thread. Much of the discussion is a reguritation of previous issues that havbe already been discussed.
MidCow
Well you got my number. I guess anything I say now is automatically discredited. Me being somewhat misinformed an all that.
But thanks for setting me straight on the issues. I feel much more informed after your informative retort. In fact I may have to take a day off just to assimilate all this new found knowledge. It's too expensive to drill oil in Colorado and government regulations prevent drilling in Alaska so the price of donuts are inflated to benefit on or off duty cops. Wow. It all makes sense now!
Now back to the flying car issue...
using the roads.
Well, SUVs with kids and hybrids with single occupants. HOV lanes are a good idea in their original form. As with anything where government is involved, people with other agendas always seem to want to force their issues onto a program not developed for them. Hybrids get tax breaks already. Allowing them on the HOV lanes without the required passengers is contrary to the problem HOVs were intended to address.
Also what and why are Law Enforcement officials onduty or off allowed to use the HOV lanes ? Another perk, just like free donuts and half-priced meals?
I guess this is one of the things government likes to do so it can make up for the fact cops are underpaid. As it is, cops - at least the uniformed officers - are probably ideal candidates for car pooling. They tend to live in the same areas, work set shifts, and do not need their own car while at work. Why not encourage them to car pool?
Cops on duty do need access to all lanes. They patrol them and have to get from place to place as quickly as possible
And those batteries last about 2 miles at most before the ICE kicks in - regen braking by itself doesn't cut it.
The same comment goes for "using the batteries to acclerate".
To get that kind of endurance and power, you would need a lot of batteries, which add weight and expense to the vehicle. And it doesn't work anyway; no one has produced such a pure hybrid - and I think there would be buyers even at 20K or so of additional costs.
I agree about the poorness of the proposal, but it said "the right two lanes", not the right lane.
You are more than welcome. Glad I was able to help you.
MidCow
It said:
• All trucks, except pickups, over 1½ tons must remain in the right two lanes on all freeways with four or more lanes and must remain in the far right lane on freeways with three or less lanes.
3 or less lanes the trucks are stuck in the right lane. No passing. Loaded trucks need to speed up downhill and slow down uphill. Restricting them to a single lane is not really practical.
Of course, the CA speed limit for trucks is ... 55 MPH. Cars 70 MPH outside of cities.
So the trucks were obeying the law.