Road Pricing

[biffvernon]

I've just heard Jeremy Clarkson say something sensible
He said that we've already got a workable way of taxing motorists - fuel tax - it means that if you drive a big gas-guzzling monster a long way you will pay a lot - if you've got a small thrifty car that you don't use much you pay less.

[Totally_Baffled]

I've just heard Jeremy Clarkson say something sensible
He said that we've already got a workable way of taxing motorists - fuel tax - it means that if you drive a big gas-guzzling monster a long way you will pay a lot - if you've got a small thrifty car that you don't use much you pay less.

Absolutely right - I cannot understand road pricing. TPTB are total tits and I seriously question there sanity.

I read one article that said the proceeds of road pricing could be used to expand regional airports!!!

FFS THIS IS SO FRUSTRATING!!

[Adam1]

I'd be surprised if anything'll come of it. As usual, the government want to introduce something that's technically very complex and too unwieldy to implement anytime soon. Unfortunately, in the process, they'll probably waste a lot of money on clever, hi-tech infrastructure that will probably be redundant due to the effects of peak oil on the price/availability of fuel.

It seems as if almost every day there's some report or other talking about, or working on the assumption of, a future of increasing levels of congestion, more technology, more globalisation, improved healthcare and underlying it all of course, more net energy. None of the leaders, commentators or consultants, all highly paid to think about the future, seem very well qualified to do so. Maybe it's because they have so much more invested (financially and emotionally) in the current trajectory than the rest of us, that they are simply incapable of imagining a change in that trajectory.

[Bandidoz]

One of the ideas "supporting" road pricing is the ability to apply different prices at different times of the day, or different prices according to the level of congestion. Although this would stop a few roads getting built (due to maximising the capacity of the existing infrastructure) it's still pointless.

The psychology is supposed to be "pay as you drive". Problem is, it isn't. If anything, it's even less so than handing over cash at a petrol station; you receive a bill at home. Ideally, you'd have to make it like metered electricity - feeding coins into a box inside the car.

[biffvernon]

One of the ideas "supporting" road pricing is the ability to apply different prices at different times of the day,

I really don't understand that one - It's up to the motorist whether he wants to sit in a traffic jam - that's the price of travelling at rush hours. If congestion was so important then the people caught up in it would go at a different time of day or use a different form of transport or stay home.
I also don't understand why someone who could run an airline was the best guy to advise about roads. Maybe they should have asked someone with a background in cycle repair.

[Adam1]

One of the ideas "supporting" road pricing is the ability to apply different prices at different times of the day,

I really don't understand that one - It's up to the motorist whether he wants to sit in a traffic jam - that's the price of travelling at rush hours. If congestion was so important then the people caught up in it would go at a different time of day or use a different form of transport or stay home.
I also don't understand why someone who could run an airline was the best guy to advise about roads. Maybe they should have asked someone with a background in cycle repair.

I must say that transport in the UK has always been one of my bugbears, pre-dating PO by about two decades! I do find it extraordinary that we are still scratching our heads wondering how to solve problems that have been handled much better (if not completely solved) by most of our neighbours; all our neighbours actually, except Ireland. I think that this latest commission (or whatever it is) is just another excuse to delay spending on much-needed (primarily) public transport. My feeling now is that PO means that many of the grander ideas will now probably never happen. We'll have enough on our plate keeping what we currently have up and running.

[biffvernon]

Jonathon Porritt was talking rather positively about the report on Radio 4 news at 10pm. Maybe he read things like:

Transport policy has no choice but to respond the challenge of climate change, for both environmental and economic reasons. Transport prices must fully reflect environmental externalities, and transport planning must take account of likely carbon prices.

But much of the report is very wordy. Here for example, and not untypical, is 'Key Finding and Recommendation 10':

10 On this basis, the strategic economic priorities for long-term transport policy should be growing and congested urban areas and their catchments; and the key inter-urban corridors and the key international gateways that are showing signs of increasing congestion and unreliability. Government should focus on these areas because they are heavily used, of growing economic importance, and showing signs of congestion and unreliability ? and these problems are set to get significantly worse. They are the places where transport constraints have significant potential to hold back economic growth.

I think he could have said this more briefly thus: Government should focus on the congested bits because they are, er, congested.

You can download the Eddington report from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/p ... report.pdf

[Vortex]

'd be surprised if anything'll come of it. As usual, the government want to introduce something that's technically very complex and too unwieldy to implement anytime soon

I worked at an electronics labs around 1999 and they had a "secret corner" where they were developing a very low cost radio transponder car identity number plate and the roadside reader.

It certainly was VERY close to being production quality even 6+ years ago.

If they have developed the database systems and data networks since then, we could see road charging coming in within a year or two.

[Bandidoz]

One of the ideas "supporting" road pricing is the ability to apply different prices at different times of the day, or different prices according to the level of congestion.

I've had some further thoughts on this - it would allow different road users to be charged differently, possibly according to, say, their profession.

So farmers, emergency services, doctors and nurses could effectively be subsidised at the point of use, without having to use any "voucher" schemes as such. It *could* also be independent of the fuel used - so stealing red diesel would be of little use, and biofuels could effectively be rationed to "the people who need it most".

[Vortex]

"The people who need it most" are usually "the people who select the people who need it most".

[WolfattheDoor]

I've written about the road charging/fuel pricing debate on my blog:
http://wolfatd.blogspot.com/

[WolfattheDoor]

Another thing occurred to me with this road pricing: how are we going to know the prices for particular roads? Every major road will have to have a cost per mile at different times and different days. Longer roads will have to be split into different priced sections. So we will all have to be able to work out the costs for a journey at a particular time and compare it with the price an hour earlier or an hour later. (If we don't bother with comparisons, then the whole purpose of the congestion charge will fail.)

This might be relatively easy on the Internet but many don't have that so the Government will have to produce the mother of all timetables. I think about my 80-year-old father trying to work out the best time to visit relatives and my brain hurts.

This scheme is madness!

[Vortex]

Many delivery companies use special software to solve The Travelling Salesman Problem ... i.e. which order should the van take between several destinations in order to save time/fuel.

This is a hard enough problem as it stands ... and will only get harder if you have to add in different road pricing over different routes.

The time element also make it MUCH harder ... you might have to take multiple medium priced routes - rather than low priced routes - in order to guarantee that you will never hit a high priced leg. Ths could lead to MORE fuel being burned.

The Law Of Unintended Consequences could really have fun and games with this!

For example, I suspect that you will end up with many "rat runs" being created i.e. short bits of quiet back roads suddely being heavily used to minimise exposure to high tariff sections.

[Billhook]

I'd well agree road pricing looks a logistical nightmare.

And it's just another means, IMO,
of making action to control GHGs unpopular.

So when,
on this sceptered isle,
of distinctly finite area,
of which too much is already under tarmac,
are we going to cap, allocate & trade
motorcar ownership ?

regards,

Bill

[MacG]

I'd well agree road pricing looks a logistical nightmare.

And it's just another means, IMO,
of making action to control GHGs unpopular.

So when,
on this sceptered isle,
of distinctly finite area,
of which too much is already under tarmac,
are we going to cap, allocate & trade
motorcar ownership ?

regards,

Bill

You will notice. When you find that you can't afford to drive anymore, you will know that you are included in the reduction scheme.