Should solo Hummer drivers be allowed the HOV lane if they're carbon neutral?
California bill SB 1374, if passed and signed into a law, would allow any car to join the HOV sticker program as long as that vehicle is carbon neutral. This would mean someone driving alone in a Hummer could legally be allowed into the HOV lane, if the Hummer's emissions were offset. Senator Jim Battin officially proposed the legislation but his press release - which includes lines like "every owner of a polluting, flashy, fuel sucking car" - makes me think he is not serious. The law is starting to grow on me anyway. Why shouldn't a carbon neutral car - even a Hummer - be allowed in the HOV lane?[Source: LAist]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Throwback 9:29AM (2/27/2008)
I will never be a fan of carbon offsets. All this does is allow you to pollute to your hearts content, as long as you can afford to pay for it.
Reply
Tim 9:32AM (2/27/2008)
Carbon offsets simply redistribute wealth from the productive to government and giant corporations.
It's a game for suckers!
DON'T PLAY THEIR GAME!!!
Reply
Nick 9:34AM (2/27/2008)
Carbon offsets are worthless. The ONLY way to help is to reduce your CO2 footprint. And that doesn't include driving a hummer.
Reply
Amanda 10:00AM (2/27/2008)
Absolutely Not! Although I agree with Throwback for the most part, there are some times when carbon off setting can be productive and beneficial to the environment, and times when there are no other options. It is, however, too often used as an excuse by big business and the wealthy so they do not need to be responsible or chage their wasteful, dirty ways. They can just throw their money at the issue and make it "go away". I hope Senator Jim Battin is joking and has only drafted this bill to spark debate.
Reply
Pete 10:02AM (2/27/2008)
Besides, HOV are to reward carpoolers, not carbon neutral whatevers. It's to reduce traffic congestion, not carbon footprint or imaginary self-loathing self-important air print.
Reply
Tony Belding 10:05AM (2/27/2008)
What in the world does carbon have to do with HOV lanes? I thought the purpose of a HOV lane was primarily to reduce traffic congestion. This measure does nothing to reduce traffic congestion.
If you put HOV stickers on electric cars, then at least you are encouraging people to drive them and may reduce the smog problem which is endemic to parts of California. But CO2 is not a smog-causing pollutant.
The only thing this measure would address -- in a laughably feeble manner -- is global warming, which remains highly speculative (to phrase it more diplomatically than Bob Lutz did).
Reply
Randy 10:17AM (2/27/2008)
What kinda of goof even believes that scam...throw money at the situation and your responsibilities are gone...."Hi my name is Randy, and I use Carbon Offset every day to keep my piece of sky clear and blue...unlike my neighbor."
Reply
Randy 10:20AM (2/27/2008)
Now this is just too comical to believe....Yes, let me get my fat a** in the car to drive one block, or I could just walk ....give me a break. Do they think were that stupid?
Reply
steven 11:06AM (2/27/2008)
First off, With consideration to all the Toyotas that get great mileage, I think you should alternate between Hummer and Toyota SUV in these splash headlines. Per the 2007 & 2008 EPA Fuel "economy" guides, there are FOUR Toyota/Lexus SUV models that get WORSE mileage than the Hummer. So, rant over...
I don't agree with this type of (mis)use of HOV lanes. Keep in mind that they were paid for by our taxes because we were told it would help the traffic congestion problems and at the same time effectively reduce fuel consumption and therefore pollution.
But, while the green collation keeps telling us that every little bit helps and it is a global problem that we all have to work on (both VERY true), some people are going to come up with "ideas" like this.
As many/some HOV lanes are underutilized, gov't officials are always looking for ways to make use of them under various ulterior motives, usually to make a buck. In some areas you can buy your way into HOV by paying a fee.
Keep in mind, the way the representative system of gov't is "supposed" to work is someone who is not willing or able to car pool see the HOV lane empty and theirs is full and they say "I need to call my representative and see what they can do about this". Granted it always gets muddled along the way.
Reply
Joe 11:58AM (2/27/2008)
This idea would eliminate the benefit of the HOV lane. All this does is allow people to buy a pass to drive in the HOV lane. Once enough people do so, the HOV lanes clog up, and then people are paying to drive in an equally slow lane. And then your are right back where you started. Heavy Congestion.
HOV lanes are for HOVs only. And motorcycles, I'll allow motorcycles.
Reply
KarenRei 12:04PM (2/27/2008)
If the carbon offset programs are rigorously studied and scientifically verified by independent experts, what, exactly, is the problem? The money from carbon offsets maens the difference between a smoke-belching coal plant and a wind or solar plant. It means the difference between deforested land and replanted land. It means methane capture facilities installed on landfills, purchase and withdrawl of emissions trading credits, subsidy for energy-efficient devices, and so on. Things that *wouldn't have happened* without the money from carbon offsets. What's so wrong with that? Just because it has that dirty word, "money", involved? Money drives cleantech just the same as it drives dirty technology.
Reply
MikeW 12:36PM (2/27/2008)
Are you comaring the H3 or H2?
The H2 weasels out of the fuel economy test by claiming a GVWR (gross vehicle weight rating) of 8500lbs+
The H2 (take premium fuel) gets less than the Sequoia/Land Cruiser 13/18
Now compare the H3 with the FJ Cruiser (1gr-fe takes 95RON, so use mid-grade). FJ automatic 16/20 on vs, 14/18 for the H3 (I5) automatic. The FJ stick gets 15/18, H3 stick 13/18.
The H3 alpha only gets 13/16
Reply
why not the LS2/LS7? 12:28PM (2/27/2008)
There has been an Escalade eligible for California's solo carpool sticker for quite some time now. And it's not even carbon-neutral, just an SULEV.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/carpool/carpool.htm
I personally thing not even ZEVs should be allowed in the carpool lane solo. Also, taxi drivers shouldn't count, so a taxi driver with only one passenger should have to drive in the regular lanes. The driver in a car like this isn't really going to the destination, he's only going there because the other person is, he might as well be a "carpool dummy".
Reply
bioburner 12:48PM (2/27/2008)
This idea is as stupid as allowing hybrid vehicles in the HOV lanes. HOV lanes are to reduce traffic congestion not reward people who drive cars that get better gas milage or off set their their cars CO2.
Reply
1985 Gripen 1:12PM (2/27/2008)
I think the bill is meant to be "tongue in cheek". It's true: why do hybrid drivers get to use the carpool lanes without passengers? Or people who pay to use them, as on the 91 in Orange County, California? Those lanes were originally designed to reduce traffic congestion by rewarding those who car share. If you allow hybrids into the carpool lane (and I'd have to say that about 60% of the cars I see in that lane are hybrids with only one person in the car) then why not people with essentially ZERO (net) carbon emissions? I buy a TerraPass for my cars each year. Why can't I use the carpool lane? I'm being facetious, of course.
IMHO the carpool lanes are a joke anyway and should be integrated into regular traffic. They don't do anything meaningful to reduce traffic congestion or pollution. To those of you who don't like offsets: at least people who buy offsets are TRYING to do something. If I drive a Saab and have bought offsets I'm emitting less net CO2 into the atmosphere than your Prius. It's not like people buy a HUMMER H1 and then carbon offset it to make themselves feel better. People who buy offsets generally buy less-polluting cars anyway. Not everyone wants a hybrid.
Reply
Dunn 1:52PM (2/27/2008)
The more people that can drive in the HOV lane the better. It is statistically improbably that the carpool encouragement of the lane offsets the increase in traffic it causes over the same highway with an additional normal lane.
Have there been any realistic studies done, or is this another politically attractive inane policy like corn-ethanol?
Reply
mike k. 2:33PM (2/27/2008)
Here's the simple reason. If every car maker offsets their cars then everybody is allowed in the HOV lane and it becomes useless!
Why not stick to car pooling and screw all this offsetting. The car itself still screws up the environment and in the end an offset HUMMER does nothing to help clean the air where its being driven anyways...
Reply
mike 6:44PM (2/27/2008)
Mike k.
With all due respect, if the goal is to cut CO2 pollution in half, wouldn't this program be Very Effective?
My only problem is SUV fuel economy is a GROSS exaggeration. They really get 2 mpg when you floor them. If SUV's were required to pay 2X OFFSET's then yes, this would be a great plan. Any engine greater then 200hp pays 2X, an engine with 300hp pays 3X, etc. and we might have a solution!
Reply
Jared 7:38AM (2/28/2008)
Concepts similar to carbon offsets have already been tried, specifically the sale of Papal Indulgences by the Catholic Church. You could sin all you want, all you had to do was pay up to the church to receive forgiveness.
Carbon offsets are the same thing. You can "sin" all you want -- continue to live as you are doing and not bother saving any energy. All you have to do is buy "forgiveness" -- that is, buy carbon offsets.
The inherent dishonesty of the loony left greenies on carbon offsets is every bit as disgusting as the sale of Papal Indulgences was in the 1500s.
Reply
icu812ru469 8:39AM (2/28/2008)
So if you're driving some pieces of crap vehicle that spews filth like there's no tomorrow, but by driving in an HOV can offset that filth, then it's allowed? Why have an HOV lane then? Everyone will be in that lane and it'll become another slow lane... STUPID IDIOTS !!!! We voted for these people into office?????
Reply