This guy really says something that I don't agree because I am in
favour of anything that
helps any more efficient means of transportation and I was thinking to
buy a Prius myself,
(though i desisted because here they sell it for over $30.000...)
But there is an issue that I would like to rise:
is it really true that from a environmental point of view the Hybrid
car (or an electric car) is such a only-good thing?
It would be interesting to know what type of damage is associated to
manufacturing and disposing the
huge batteries used in these cars.
Of course they move pollution to a place where it may be controlled and
remove it from the street
but it would be interesting to know what are the environmental costs to
pay somewhere else.
Sometimes the deforestation and digging of land needed
to mine some special materials have huge unexpected proportions.
If anybody of you has figures I would really be interested.
Thank you.
Massimo Portolani
On 31/ago/05, at 15:40, Jim Devine wrote:
August 30, 2005/New York TIMES op-ed
The Road to Hell Is Clogged With Righteous Hybrids
By JOHN TIERNEY
LOS ANGELES — Judgment Day has arrived in California, but not exactly
as prophesied. The ones sitting on the right-hand side are the
sinners.
They're stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic while the righteous fly past
them in the far left lanes. Those freeway lanes used to be reserved
for car pools, but they've just been opened to a new group: those of
us virtuous enough to drive the right hybrids.
[only the second-generation Priuses can use the carpool lane, for
example.]
I'm not a good enough person yet to own a hybrid, but I've been
passing for one. I rented a Toyota Prius for the pleasure of cruising
the car pool lanes and parking free at meters, another perk available
here in Los Angeles. I've enjoyed it all, especially the envious looks
from guys in S.U.V.'s, and I can understand why hybrid drivers in
other states and cities are clamoring for similar privileges.
[I doubt that there are any rentals with the right stickers to drive
in the carpool lane yet. The stickers were just issued. This makes me
doubt the veracity of this author.]
But even if these new privileges put more fuel-efficient cars on the
road, I'm afraid the net effect will be dirtier air and more gasoline
consumption. The promoters of hybrids are committing the sin
identified by the ecologist Garrett Hardin in "The Tragedy of the
Commons," the 1968 essay providing one of the foundations of
environmentalism.
[the article doesn't convince me that the pollution or gas-use would
be _worse_. The program creates a new incentive to drive more
fuel-efficient cars.]
The essay's title refers to a pasture that's commonly owned and open
to all. Since every individual has an incentive to increase his own
herd, the pasture will eventually be destroyed by overgrazing, just as
other types of unregulated commons - the ocean, the atmosphere - will
be damaged by overproduction and pollution when too many individuals
pursue their own goals.
[but the point of Priuses and similar hybrids is that they're more
efficient than other cars, so that they are less destructive to the
environment. Even if their use doesn't end up being a good thing in
carpool lanes, they are more efficient means of transportation
elsewhere.
[the potential problem is that the carpool lane will fill up with
Priuses and the like (Honda Insights). But that doesn't make the
environment worse.]
This seems like an obvious lesson, Hardin wrote, but it must be
"constantly refreshed" because each new generation repeats the
mistake. As an example of "how perishable the knowledge is," he
pointed to politicians in a Massachusetts town who declared that
people didn't have to pay at parking meters during the Christmas
shopping season. By giving away the spaces at a time of peak demand,
the town encouraged some people to hog spaces and left everyone else
unable to park.
[Redondo Beach, near where I live, does this. It's good for business,
so they do it every year. I don't think you're allowed to park all
night, which means you can't really "hog" parking places.]
That's the same mistake being made with hybrids. In Virginia, where
they've been allowed for years in the car pool lanes, the lanes have
become so clogged that an advisory committee has repeatedly
recommended their banishment. The same problem will occur in
California, where some of the car pool lanes were congested even
without hybrids.
[in CA, there's a limit on the number of stickers issued. That deals
with this problem completely.]
As traffic slows down, there will be more idling cars burning more gas
and emitting more pollution, but politicians will be reluctant to
offend hybrid owners by revoking their privilege. So it will be harder
than ever to make the one change proven to speed up traffic and help
the environment: convert the car pool lanes into what engineers call
high-occupancy toll lanes.
[the privilege can easily be denied to new entrants. BTW, my wife who
has the privilege of driving her Prius in the carpool lane, is getting
much better mileage. ]
These HOT lanes would be free for the truly virtuous commuters - those
in car pools, jitneys and buses - and available to anyone else for a
toll that would vary with demand. By enticing just enough drivers to
maintain a steady flow of high-speed traffic, the HOT lanes could
handle many more vehicles per hour than today's car pool lanes, which
are usually either too empty or too congested to accommodate the
optimum number.
[it is a good idea to keep the traffic moving. But I don't know how
this guy expects to arrange that. He suddenly introduced the idea of
paying a toll from right field. This fellow needs to take lessons in
being honest rather than sneaking in alternatives this way.]
With HOT lanes, everyone would come out ahead, drivers as well as
environmentalists. As more drivers paid for a guaranteed speedy
commute in the left lane, they would leave the regular lanes less
clogged, so there would be fewer cars stuck in traffic jams, wasting
gas and spewing fumes.
With HOT lanes, you could still encourage people to buy hybrids by
promising them a discount on the tolls, but there's a fairer way to
promote environmental virtue. Instead of arbitrarily rewarding a few
cars for having a certain kind of engine, set tolls for all vehicles
according to their weight. Since S.U.V.'s and other heavy vehicles
require more room to brake, they need more empty pavement between them
and the next car, and they should pay extra for it.
[how we could charge tolls in L.A. without severely limiting the
number of entrances (or spending a lot on fancy technology) is unclear
to me. Why not simply charge much larger DMV fees for SUVs and the
like? Oh, no, governor Ah-Nold said we couldn't do that.
[BTW, people aren't "arbitrarily" rewarded "for having a certain kind
of engine." Rather, it's the miles per gallon that the car gets which
is used to decide access to the carpool lane. It could run on wind for
all the regulators care.]
I realize that many Prius owners would rather have free privileges in
the car pool lane than a discount in a HOT lane. But they'd be moving
a lot faster, and they would still have one great satisfaction.
As they contemplated how much more the Hummer drivers were paying in
tolls, devout environmentalists would experience the "joyful sense"
that Jonathan Edwards predicted for Judgment Day: "When the saints in
glory, therefore, shall see the doleful state of the damned, how will
this heighten their sense of the blessedness of their own state, so
exceedingly different from it!"
[any popular article that cites Garrett Hardin should be _a priori_
judged as cynical and likely wrong. This one seems mostly silly.]
--
Jim Devine
