Re:In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop...
by hollerith on Thursday December 11, 2025 @09:05AM
(#46231501)
Interesting. If not to reduce CO2 emissions, what was the rationale presented to the voters for having high taxes on fuel 40 yr ago?
In the US, Federal lawmakers would be voted out of office (even now after the science of climate change has settled) if they imposed taxes on fuels anywhere near as high as European lawmakers do.
Re:In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop...
by potato3732842 on Thursday December 11, 2025 @09:27AM
(#46231786)
>Interesting. If not to reduce CO2 emissions, what was the rationale presented to the voters for having high taxes on fuel 40 yr ago?
Energy security. They didn't have north sea oil back then. Buying from Russia or the ME was fraught with political peril. And of course the .gov is never gonna pass up a chance to increase revenue.
Re:In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop...
by efaref on Sunday December 14, 2025 @11:43AM
(#46264360)
I don't know about mainland Europe, but in the UK it really was exclusively about CO2 emissions per distance travelled, to the extent that Vehicle Excise Duty (the annual tax you pay on a car) was defined in terms of g/km of CO2 emitted. This happened in 2001 and wasn't changed until the wake of the emissions cheating scandals [1].
[1] https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables/rates-for-cars-re...
Europe began embracing diesels 40yr ago when they were noisy and stinky and they did it because they taxed the crap out of fuel so people rightfully prioritized buying vehicles that got better fuel economy.
Giving a crap about CO2 is a recent thing.