I don't see the logic in this argument. Electric vehicles are not going to destroy the roads.

Further, electric vehicles weigh more than comparable gas or diesel vehicles, making the ratio of road wear to tax contribution even more disparate.

Even if you agree electric vehicles are good for society overall, we will need to find a new way to fund road maintenance.

[1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X16...

When the day comes that the revenue from the fuel tax has dipped low enough that the money needs to be replaced, I am quite sure we can come up with 300 other ways to allocate the tax burden appropriately.

This is the point of the debate. Prior to electric vehicles, we have been more or less in a situation where we could concentrate tax burden of road maintenance on vehicle users/owners. Electric vehicle use is much harder to measure apart from coarse odometer readings taken during inspection.

As to the sister comment on how do we pay for the extra electricity infrastructure... through your electricity bill?

Now the hard part is getting accurate distance traveled figures from all road users. Good luck with that.

> As to the sister comment on how do we pay for the extra electricity infrastructure... through your electricity bill?

Yes, and the system is breaking down because of solar. Typically, most of what you pay for electricity goes towards maintaining the line to your house, not towards generation. When you get solar panels that cover most of your usage, but keep the connection for use when the sun does not shine, your bill goes down to the point where it's no longer enough to maintain your grid connection.

The correct solution to that is to disaggregate transmission and generation, and for transmission bill you for the size of your main incoming fuse instead of consumption. However, in much of the US the utilities are heavily constrained in how they bill you by law, and cannot do this, so the only thing they can do is hike up prices on everyone, so solar is even more appealing and more people get it, resulting in even higher prices...

The MOT test in the UK checks emissions, roadworthiness, basic functionality. No reason why it couldn't also report mileage.

Most modern cars provide an API so you can track mileage. Again, not hard to provide that as a taxable figure.

Unfortunately the UK does not have proper emissions checks as part of the MOT.

There is a (subjective) visual check for visible smoke, and a metered exhaust check which again only tests generically for "smoke", ie large particulates.

Unfortunately there is no testing of specific pollutants (NOx, PM2.5, PM10, etc) so many vehicles can pass MOT even if they are way outside allowed emissions levels, have had DPF removed, etc.

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicles/licensing-rego/road-user-c...

Just read of the mileage counter, end of story.

Only took me a few seconds to figure out how to abuse the distance traveled tax for combustion engines. Physically roll back the odometer if the vehicle is old enough, do it electronically, disconnect the odometer, and/or other ways. I think people that travel around the country a lot would abuse. FYI, messing with the odometer is a felony so don't do it.

My state does not have yearly inspections, so nobody is going to read my odometer.

The simple answer is a mileage tax on registration of vehicles, thoufh California’s EV fee coming in 2020 is simpler if not as well scaled to impact.

My state does not have yearly inspections, so nobody is going to read my odometer.

There are some +ve and some -ve points about each technology and I'd rather have the govt build roads every year or research on building better roads if that is what it takes to get every vehicle to be electric.

I was specifically referencing semis, where an incredible amount of road damage comes from, and the need for new road funding to account for the transition from diesel taxes.

The logic is that road damage does not scale linearly with vehicle weight, and with current battery tech, an electric semi will need to complete more trips for the same amount of cargo due to the battery's weight eating into the load capacity.

I can't imagine it not being related at least to GVWR / num_tires.

Pardon my ignorance but I thought the S was a luxury sedan and not a pickup or large SUV? Does the weight of the S compare favorably with vehicles in its own class?

Model S Curb Weight: 4,647.3 lbs

Cadillac CTS: 3,652 to 4,016 lbs

---------

The Model S is anywhere from 1000lbs to 500lbs more than other vehicles in its class.

Diesel taxes are one way to help make the truck industry cover the costs of road improvements, which electric semis will never have to pay. This requires a new funding source given how much semis destroy the roads.

Model S Curb Weight: 4,647.3 lbs

Applying the tax on a per-gallon basis is great for environmentalism, as it encourages higher fuel efficiency. Applying it by vehicle classification and cost/mile could eliminate the subsidization, but would be a huge pain to keep track of.

[1] https://tax.iowa.gov/iowa-fuel-tax-rate-changes-effective-ju...

That's hardly true, most states have enacted an EV tax on registration that covers the same wear and tear from the gas tax.

When I last ran the numbers I paid more for the EV tax(which I'm happy to do in order to pay my fair share) then I did in gas.

There's also a simple solution to the federal tax, add it to registration just the same way the state tax works.

my state, Georgia, is damn obnoxious with a two hundred dollar fee per year to declare as an EV; my car which is a Volt can declare either way; which when I ran the numbers put me beyond my normal driving on gasoline alone. Meaning I decided to not list as an EV because it punishing, not rewarding.

[0] Table 7: average marginal cost per mile, 2008-2013 at http://www.atri-online.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/ATRI-O...

Any weight you add to the cab comes out of the payload for a vehicle application that hauls at the legal limit.

Page 9 shows that even pickups cause 7x more wear than a passenger car.

Additionally, any extra weight comes from the haul capacity of the truck, this means that more trips will be needed to move the same amount of cargo, and again causing a disproportional amount of wear on the road.

Example: a lot of companies are not doing a great job of planning multi-hop truck routes and instead send a less full truck to every location. Similarly, the trucks are only full in one direction because that's easier to manage than planning routes that, for example, drop off at a store then visit a vendor before returning to a distribution center.

If trucking costs increased in proportion to road wear, you can bet improving these operational processes will be a higher priority!

Every time we've gotten a truck-shipped freight delivery in the last decade, the trailer has been mostly empty. Our business is not at the end of the road, either.

I'm not sure a Model S is in the same category of vehicle as a Honda Pilot. What point are you trying to make?

Agreed that funding the roadways should be a topic of discussion (also because it's private contractors - often with connections to those authorizing public funds).

Maybe there should be a joule tax applied to all forms of energy, a portion of which is dedicated to environmental efforts and a portion to infrastructure maintenance? There could be a lower tax rate for green energy (perhaps no environmental element, only road and electric infrastructure costs).

There was lots of debate about net metering in Nevada a year or two ago. One element from that discussion was if everyone was on solar, there wouldn't be money for maintaining the grid. My proposal is to avoid that issue by acknowledging there are costs to remaining connected to the grid even if you net meter to 0.

That would address the environmental side. I think a cost/mile applied to vehicles of different classifications would be the best way to address road wear.

One could easily see this becoming politicized to harm whichever industry the state's friends wanted. Eg if Old Fossil wanted a jab at New Electric to "level the field against unfair competition", slapping a big joule tax would do it.

My guess? Most people buy both cars to haul 1 person a very few miles almost every day.

Again, presenting data to make a point that lacks context only detracts from your argument.

Put another way: the Model S is heavier than most vehicles in its own class. What is so difficult to understand about that?

What you are presenting is opinion (that most Pilot owners only drive a few miles alone) unburdened by any backing facts or data. It may be true, I don’t know. But you provide nothing to back up your claim, yet present it as fact.

To put more simply - if you banned semis roads would not last 1400x longer, nowhere near in fact.

[1] https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Excise-and-excise-equivalent...

Ok but its not like these guys are just joyriding around, they are providing a service to make sure that people get the things they need and food to eat

You are correct about these electric trucks not paying gas tax though. Thats a problem.