Debate rages over whether to extend HOV-lane exemptions for hybrids in CA
Besides the potential feeling of environmental superiority, one of the great benefits to having a hybrid in California has been the availability of a magic little sticker set for a vehicle's rear bumper and fender. The "Access OK" tags have allowed its possessors to cruise in the carpool lanes even while driving solo. The special lanes – alternatively known as HOV lanes (High Occupancy Vehicle) or diamond lanes – have proven to be a great time saver on California's clogged freeway system, but not everyone can find a ride-share partner to grant them access. Thus, getting a hybrid with one of the highly prized yellow (or white) decals is like getting yourself a free passenger – without the annoying banter.
As a result of their rarity and ultility, used cars with those decals usually command a premium. Heck, we've even reported on sticker thefts. The problem is that the benefits of those stickers were originally set to run out by 2009. The government intervened and extended those limits through January 1, 2011, but some would like to see them extended further – like through 2016.
Naturally, as more people move towards more efficient vehicles, some think the program should be halted altogether, while others (especially those with stickers themselves) continue to think that hybrids and other "clean" vehicles deserve the added benefit of solo access.You can be sure that this debate will continue right up until the deadline – unless California's legislature steps in to extend the program before then.
[Sources: The Los Angeles Times; California DMV | Image: David McNew/Getty]
Below are the criteria used to issue each sticker according to the California DMV website:
A vehicle that meets California's super ultra-low emission vehicle (SULEV) standard for exhaust emissions and the federal inherently low-emission vehicle (ILEV) evaporative emission standard.
A 2004 model-year or older vehicle that meets the California ultra-low emission vehicle (ULEV) standard for exhaust emissions and the federal ILEV standard.
A hybrid or alternative fuel vehicle that meets California's advanced technology partial zero-emission vehicle (AT PZEV) standard for criteria pollutant emissions and has a 45 miles per gallon or greater fuel economy highway rating.
A 2004 model-year or older hybrid vehicle that has a 45 mile per gallon or greater fuel economy highway rating and meets California's ultra-low emission vehicle (ULEV), super ultra-low emission vehicle (SULEV), or partial zero-emission vehicle (PZEV) standards.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
pmgpmg 8:29PM (9/28/2009)
This is non democratic and non-sense.
- If you can afford a new hybrid car you have the right to drive in HOV: no very democratic
I have a small car (not as expensive as an hybrid car) with a very good mileage: @#$%!
- Keeping cars with bad mileage with their engine idling and stopped bumper to bumper while putting hybrid cars (designed to have their engine turned off while stopped bumper to bumper) in a fast lane is a non-sense: this should be the opposite.
Reply
alex.aumann 8:45PM (9/28/2009)
pmgpmg-- true.
I agree, the focus should be on high MPG vehicles, not hybrids. Electric cars, some motorcycles, some scooters, some recent diesels, and some smaller gasoline cars should all meet the criteria. They could even legislate to raise the criteria every few years. Today it's 40 MPG, in a couple years 45, etc, etc.
The only tricky part is a cop would need a book to figure out whether a vehicle met the criteria. "That's a 2020 flex fuel plug-in Prius you say? (flip, flip, flip) That only gets 150 MPG! You've just earned yourself an expensive ticket!"
Reply
Jon 3:55AM (9/29/2009)
They could change the sticker so that it has a number or color based on the class of vehicle. That'd be easier for cops.
classy 9:27PM (9/28/2009)
during peak hours all lanes should be used.. why the hell is a perfectly good lane being used by a small minority? during peak traffic hours! pretty retarded
Reply
PopSmith 9:51PM (9/28/2009)
The HOV ("High" Occupancy Vehicle) lane was setup to encourage car pooling to work, school etc.
By granting HOV access to solo drivers of hybrids and pure-electric vehicles, they are trying to encourage people to buy those types of cars. The next step is an electric-powered only lane. (just joking!)
Joel 11:58PM (9/28/2009)
UC Berkeley and CSU Fremont did a joint study showing that HOV lanes do not increase carpooling or decrease traffic and in fact cause more accidents. HOVs are an interesting idea, but they in fact do not work within a 100 mile radius of the San Francisco Bay Area. I doubt they work elsewhere, either. Gas prices, insurance, etc. should cause people to carpool. HOVs punish those who are poor, cannot carpool due to situation and those who do not need/want the newest car with a HOV sticker.
Tohe 1:09AM (9/29/2009)
@Joel "causes more accidents"
Here in South Florida we have a HOV-lane along 95 and it is closed up with dividers all the way from Miami to almost Fort Lauderdale, I guess that helps reduce accidents. I agree with the views expressed here. The HOV-lane is not the place to promote greener cars, do so by imposing higher oil taxes, use that money for incentives and perhaps even consider preferable parking.
alex 10:08PM (9/28/2009)
funny thing is, from an environmental stand point it would be better to let only the biggest gas guzzling trucks use the HOV lane. Hybrids do best in stop and go traffic (such as the clogged rush hour freeway) and big gas guzzling trucks do best when moving at a constant speed (and presumably the HOV lane has less congestion)
oh the irony!
Reply
Satn 1:41AM (9/29/2009)
Douchebags in SUVs already do. The dickhead you have to be (or become) to get an SUV means you're the most likely to ignore traffic laws as well.
miles 8:41AM (9/29/2009)
satn, grow up. please.
jpm 1:15AM (9/29/2009)
Haha suckers fight all you want while i cruz by you in the HOV lane.... riding solo.... with no sticker.... on my motorcycle.
Reply
NmGfan 7:09PM (9/29/2009)
Same here, except my daily driver is a NmG motorcycle.
jpm 8:29PM (9/29/2009)
Nice, but can you split lanes with that thing
PowerCell 1:38AM (9/29/2009)
If they want to make a change for the better, make HOV lanes available to 2 or more LICENSED DRIVERS ONLY!!!
Reply
shmooopy 3:40AM (9/29/2009)
There are two issues here:
1) are HOV lanes good policy in the first place, how are they best governed?
2) is this program a well crafted incentive for hybrid cars?
These issues should be considered separately. The legislature should first ask, what is the best and highest use of HOV lanes and then consider all of the options. This never happened when the hybrid benefits were originally considered.
Personally I think HOV lanes should be reformed. The best solution is to convert them into HOT lanes. That way if and only if there is extra capacity on the lane that capacity can be offered to solo drivers for a price. The revenue goes to transit on the corridor. This way we get the best use of HOV lanes, there is no problem of wasted capacity and we still get the benefit of faster service for carpools, van-pools and buses.
2) what is the best incentive for hybrid cars?
I would argue that the state has much better potential incentives for hybrid and high MPG cars than the HOV sticker.
But first, what is wrong with the HOV sticker?
a) It has limited capacity. The HOV benefit is no longer offered because of a worry that there would be too much traffic on the HOV lanes. Too many stickers and the benefit is undermined by congestion, and so are any help the HOV lanes might provide to buses, carpools and van-pools. It's simply a program that cannot scale, directed at a behavior we want to scale. Better to devise a policy that scales so that we can keep offering the incentive for hybrids on a long-term basis.
b) Even if a sticker is obtained it does not have a predictable value for the purchaser of a vehicle. If a given lane has too much traffic in the particular HOV lane, Caltrans is required to reevaluate the use of stickers on a given lane and can cancel the benefit to hybrids if it needs to in order to protect HOV flow on the highway. This means that someone could buy a Hybrid with the intend to have use of a specific HOV lane, for example the one on their way to work, and then a week later find that that lane has be reclassified to be no longer available for hybrids. People responding to state programs deserve to know that whatever benefit they have been promised will come to them. Confusing and deluding consumers is not good policy.
c) The program that was created never actually functioned as an incentive, it simply allowed owners of vehicles or dealers to charge a higher price for them. Hybrids were selling well before this program was created, many dealers had no inventory and were charging well over sticker. Further, the program took a long time to be put into action. By the time the stickers were available, the California market already had nearly 80K hybrids on the road. The effect was not just to incentivize the purchase cars that they already would have bought, but in many cases it rewarded people for cars they already owned. An incentive should encourages you to do something - not reward you for past action.
d) This program creates an enduring entitlement and as we are seeing once you give people an entitlement it's very difficult to take it away. Today there are many more hybrids on the road than could be included in this program. For that reason it cannot be expanded, but neither should it be extended. Nothing lasts forever and the people who bought cars under this program got special treatment for a time, but it was always scheduled to end. It should end as planned. That was always the deal. Anyone who says otherwise is simply uninformed about the terms of the program. The state should not reward ignorance.
e) The HOV infrastructure is very valuable and buying a car a few years ago is just not good enough a reason to have free access to it. The HOV lanes should be dedicated to people who are willing on a daily basis to make a sacrifice of convenience. We tolerate the special treatment they get because when it works it takes cars off the road and makes road based transit possible. Sacrificing that system for a few car sales that happened years ago simply makes no sense. So what that these people bought a car - big deal. There is no sacrifice there. The program was always scheduled to end. They have no cause for anger.
So given these concerns, what would be a good incentive?
There are many possibilities, but why not try a simple one? Why not just give buyers of higher MPG cars a discount on sales tax? Cars can be classified by MPG for a given set of discounts. The highest tier can pay 25%. Below that 50% tax etc. And at the same time higher taxes could be placed on less efficient cars.
Sure the state loses some revenues but its a system that would be a much better deal for the state and would remove all of the problems above:
a) sales tax discount is totally scaleable. it can be extended to as many cars as can be sold.
b) sales tax discount has a definite and predictable benefit. people get the benefit when they buy the car, it helps offset the premium you pay for a hybrid, it spikes sales...everyone is happy.
c) sales tax discount rewards the future purchase, not past purchases. that is a real incentive to action.
d) sales tax discount creates no entitlement. you get a one time discount and you move along.
e) sales tax discount would have no special impact on infrastructure. no special administration needed.
So there - please please please don't automatically continue this program. Reform the HOV lanes in the best way possible - I would argue for HOTs but every options should be on the table and a real analysis should occur.
In the meantime, consider simpler incentives like tax discounts for hybrids. Simple, easy, extendible.
Reply
jpm 1:45PM (9/29/2009)
goddam, you need your own blog
Eletruk 7:20PM (9/29/2009)
In reality, hybrid owners already get a tax break. Since they use less gas, they pay less gas tax.
Laurens 3:47AM (9/29/2009)
It can be worse: in the Netherlands a Prius company car driver receives a total of 17.000 Euro's in government grants over 4 years/150.000 km's, to save a paltry 2.5 tonne of CO2 (compared to a state of art diesel car) trading for 25 Euro's per tonne.
We also have special lanes for buses and taxi's in the bigger cities...
Reply
Throwback 8:33AM (9/29/2009)
I thought the purpose of HOV lanes was to reduce congestion by forcing people to car-pool. Do hybrids create less congestion than a non-hybrid?
Reply
kcmurphy88 1:42PM (9/29/2009)
These lanes used to have two types of occupants: retired couples and mothers with children. Now we've add Priuses. Very, very few are actual carpoolers -- that experiment failed 20 years ago.
Really the only thing to do is either abolish the diamond lanes altogether (unlikely), or open them up based on a strict and ever-increasing mileage number.
Several questions:
1. Which mileage number, since we are talking about freeway speeds where hybrids do not excel.
2. How do you count things like the Volt? It is a "true electric" for limited ranges only.
3. How do you count true electrics? The electricity has a source.
Reply