this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
468 points (98.5% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 128 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Cars should be taxed based on their potential for road wear, which is calculated approximately by their weight to the fourth power.

Adding such a tax, where every vehicle paya relative to what they do to the road surface they roll on, would instantly make all SUVs unviable. It would also increase the incentives for shipping freight by rail by an incredible amount.

[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 50 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes please, apply the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polluter_pays_principle

The absence of it's application means you make others pay for the costly decisions of a few, incentivizing and subsidizing damaging behaviour.

The absence also often means wealth transfer from poor to rich, as you need to have some wealth to be able to cause significant 'pollution'.

It makes so much sense. "You want this? Ok, then pay for what it entails, all the consequences." Only then people make informed decisions.

[–] Kage520@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Dude, we are still stuck with half of America thinking more CO2 is good because it's "extra plant food". This policy you suggest would have them countering saying they should pay less for helping to feed the forests with their vehicle's emissions.

It's a great solution, but I don't know how we could get it passed.

[–] Lifebandit666@feddit.uk 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Great idea, I hear Aramco is the world's biggest polluter, let's start there.

[–] Llewellyn@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

You can start from several points in parallel.
There's no need to wait for Aramco.

[–] Anekdoteles@feddit.de 19 points 1 year ago

Cars should be taxed based on their potential for road wear, which is calculated approximately by their weight to the fourth power.

Road wear comes from weight and power, so does pollution. Add size to the equation and you can estimate a cars dangerousness. Look only at size and you can see a cars damage to urban spaces. Hence, private vehicles should be taxed based on their size, weight and power. Bonus points for tire width, because tires are a non-recycable environmental problem and super-wide tires add nothing to the world but damage.

[–] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tesla model S is heavier than my diesel truck. Many EVs probably are

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

I think it's probably likely that EVs are inherently a little heavier than ICEs, but I don't think it explains all of the weight growth trend of EVs. If we want to make sure that EVs do not become uncompetitive in relation to ICEs under this type of scheme, you could simply give them the first N kilograms off. This makes sure that the property of road wear still gets priced in for relatively heavier EVs, without making them directly uncompetitive.

[–] leaf@feddit.nl 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Dutch cars are taxed on weight, with temporary exceptions for EVs.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Does it scale to the fourth power? If yes, colour me impressed.

[–] SquashyO@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

You'd need some carve out for electric vehicles, they are super heavy compared to a gas car of the same size.

[–] Trihilis@feddit.nl 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As someone who lives in a country that actually has this system. No. It's a shitty system. It results in old shitty cars that pollute like insanity. Some cars are more economical and safer than some badly built cars with less safety features and those safer cars are actually punished with this system.

You are literally better off buying an old banger that is falling apart and a road hazard than a new car because of our stupid tax system. And the people who drive SUVs here are usually rich and don't care about higher road tax.