Parking Costs Linked to Emissions
by Matthew Sparkes, London, UK on 04. 2.07
Richmond, in South London, has introduced new parking charges linked to carbon-dioxide emissions. Large and heavily-polluting cars will pay three times the standard cost, which could be up to £750 a year, according to the BBC. In many parts of London there is completely free parking for green cars, as in other cities.
Personally I think that a family with two SUV-type cars, living in London, should be penalized a lot more that £750 (around $1500). Justifications for owning such a car have never made sense to me. Claims that they are safer don't make much sense in London, where you rarely get the opportunity to drive above 30mph anyway.
David Trigg, cabinet member for traffic, transport and parking, said, 'we want to encourage all residents in our borough to consider how they can reduce their carbon footprints in whatever way they are able. And switching to a car with lower emissions is one way to do that.'
That's an admirable goal, but financial restrictions will have little effect on the demographic that drives SUVs. If a family can afford two such cars, then they can afford to pay £750 for a parking permit. Unless restrictions are prohibitively high, then there will be a negligible impact on emissions in the city.
If the measures reduce even slightly the numbers of heavy-polluting cars on the road, then it's a positive move, although it would be good to see more sensible and practical measures to penalize polluters. In London there is a congestion charge of £8 per day, from which hybrid cars are exempt. If you drive a more efficient, but standard car, then you must still pay the charge. In Sweden the rules are based on mileage, which seems to make more sense.
However, by far the most sensible strategy I have ever heard is to more heavily tax only the fuel itself. That way, the more efficient the car you choose, and the less you drive, it the less you pay.
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- "I Have Seen Things" - Japan Car At London's Science Museum
- Emissions from Soil Organic Carbon Not as Bad as Previously Thought
- Will the Next New Deal be Transit-Based? Three Plans to Rescue the Economy and the Earth with Public Transportation
- Geoengineering Redux: Fertilizing Trees with Nitrogen to Fight Climate Change
Ah, those Chelsea Tractors!
SUV = symbol of power and social status.
Hmm. What happens when everyone drives a hybrid? Will they let everyone park for free? Um, no. The gov't will just figure out a new way to impose taxes. I'm not a fan of taxes as a method to curb behavior; money corrupts policy.
"The gov't will just figure out a new way to impose taxes. I'm not a fan of taxes as a method to curb behavior; money corrupts policy."
Incentives are part of all markets and they are usually the best way to achieve desired goals. You certainly won't convince people just by asking them nicely..
I find your comment "Personally I think that a family with two SUV-type cars, living in London, should be penalized a lot more that £750" curious...
Before I go onto explain my thinking in more detail, my summary would be: "Why does one tonne of CO2 from an SUV seem to be valued at maybe 10 or 20 or even 50 times that of a tonne of CO2 from another source or even a tonne of CO2 from another car?".
These taxes are aimed squarely at CO2 levels, which is fine because this is the big issue of the day. Other arguments such as car size are fatuous as many such cars are scarcely any larger than a family saloon. Even if size or safety were key factors my argument would still hold because my argument is about proportionality.
I should declare that my family is a single car user doing only 8,000 miles per year due to cycling to work and school. My choice of car - a Volvo XC90 SUV.
My XC90 produces 239gm be kilometre, a Toyota Prius produces 109gm per K (correct me if I'm wrong). So someone driving an XC90 10,000 miles per year (16k kilometers) will generate approximately 2 tonnes more CO2 than the Prius owner (roughly double). And yet you think it right to tax the XC90 owner £750 ($1425) parking charge, on top of the newly announced extra £300 ($570) road tax while the Prius pays almost no tax?
This fictional XC90 owner would be paying over £1000 ($1900) for two extra tonnes of CO2?
I don't closely follow world carbon trading but I think the highest I ever remember anyone suggesting CO2 should be trading at is about $100 per tonne and it currently trades at something like $20 per tonne.
Why is one tonne of CO2 from an SUV ninety-five times more expensive than one tonne of CO2 from a Toyota or one tonne of CO2 from any other source?
"Justifications for owning such a car have never made sense to me. "
Well, there you go! We'll never figure out a good solution to bringing sustainability to the world unless we understand why people do unsustainable things. And causing people to suffer (punishing them and/or taking their money) generally doesn't give them any incentive to want to work with you :-) Do we want these people on our side, or do we want to make them our enemies?
If we want them on our side, how about we start by asking, respectfully and honestly, why they want to own cars? And then work with them to find ways to meet their needs in more sustainable ways. Once they underestand that we aren't a threat, they will be open to our ideas, rather then becoming defensive.
Owning an SUV is one of the more selfish things to do if you don't NEED one.
They may be safer to the person inside (been debated), but much more deadly to those on the outside.
The also don't seem to care about the environment outside the SUV, so long as they are snug and cozy outside.
When you use words like "We" and "them" you're already considering them enemies.
Global climate change is an abstract enough problem that it, for now, does not intrude on people's daily consciousness. Economic incentives are what govern behavior, and even if 1500 dollars isn't a burden for some people, it might be a high enough perceived penalty to at least get some people to reconsider their options the next time they go car shopping.
well, its not parking these cars that's causing CO2 emissions - its driving. So a tax to discourage CO2 emission should be a tax on gas. Anything else will just cause strange and unintented effects (like people driving longer distances to find cheaper / non regulated parking space).