andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2009-11-16 11:01 am
Entry tags:

Delicious LiveJournal Links for 11-16-2009

[identity profile] a-pawson.livejournal.com 2009-11-16 04:12 pm (UTC)(link)
The idea behind is to try and build in an incentive to reduce congestion. Fuel costs are flat no matter wheere you live, but by charging people different amounts depending on where they drive, you can avoid penalising people who live in rural areas where there is probably no public transport and no congestion.

[identity profile] call-waiting.livejournal.com 2009-11-16 08:45 pm (UTC)(link)
Charging different rates based on location would seem to make sense -- reduce peak congestion and localised atmospheric pollution -- but the article only mentions a flat rate of €0.03 per km.

Driving a kilometre in the city is already generally more expensive than driving a kilometre in rural areas, due to traffic, traffic controls etc. I'm sure this effect isn't enough to normalise the system such that removal of vehicle duty will sufficiently compensate those in rural areas for the extra fuel costs, though!

Additionally, a non-constant tax rate would have to be carefully crafted in order to avoid encouraging people to travel further to save money: say, driving all the way round the city rather than straight through. If you happened to be driving a Prius or an Insight that wouldn't burn too much more fuel in city traffic, then the long way round could cause more pollution but still work out cheaper.