One City

One City


Why We Should Pay People to Drive Hybrids

posted by Jerry Kolber

Driving back from Vermont today I was considering how strange it is that automotive technology is so primitive.  If all the other familiar technologies in our lives had stopped at the maturity level of gas powered cars, we would be travelling home for the holidays in a stagecoach, listening to the IDP live by candlelight, and at home on hand-cranked wax phonographs. Yet the gas cylinder powered automobile engine remains largely unchanged, although in some cases it is more fuel efficient.  Computers became common-place because they promise to make us able to communicate more efficiently and quickly and cheaply, airplanes became common because they promise to get us more quickly from point A to B, and electric lights became common because who could resist the idea of man’s desire to achieve more, later, longer hours, a triumph over the sun itself.  So why do cars remain so deeply rooted in technology that is in-efficient, dangerous, polluting, and more than a century old? It’s because the people trying to propose options, whatever they may be, have never managed to answer the question “What’s in it for me?”  If the option is a slower electric car that costs more to run and requires frequent recharges, there’s really “nothing in it for me”.  If it’s a hybrid car that still uses some gas, isn’t particularly large or attractive, and (again) costs more to buy than would be recouped from the gas savings, such an option also fails to answer the question “What’s in it for me?”
So, to encourage more development of infrastructure for and social acceptance of alternatively fueled vehicles, there is only one answer – tell people “what’s in it for them”.  While a small minority of the population (most readers of this blog included) may be willing to take actions that have no direct bneneficial consequence for oursleves, if we sit around waiting for the rest of society to cop the same attitude we’re going to be buried under a mountain of crappy weather and plastic bags.
My proposal would be, for a period of twelve months give a 100% tax deduction to anyone who purchases any mass-produced alternatively fueled car.  In those twelve months, enough early adopters and “rich people” would buy the expensive vehicles that an infrastructure would be forced to come into existence.  Following that twelve-month period, the 100% tax deduction should continue for a three-year period, and in addition a ten-percent additional energy tax should be added to the cost of every gasoline powered automobile. This combination of incentive and dis-incentive would quickly make everyone feel that there was “something in it for them” and would lead to a rapid increase in vehicle technology, of the same sort we see in the fields of communications and computing.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(8)
post a comment
damaris

posted October 5, 2008 at 11:07 pm


Everyone would be buying a car if a 100% tax deduction was offered. We wouldn’t have to depend on the rich and early adopters.
Also we would drastically cut tax revenues which we need at the moment.
We will also have more cars on the road. Energy efficient or not do we really need that?
In Europe they have higher government regulations that are requiring vehicles to meet certain environmental standards. As always we Americans are behind.
Government regulation seems like a better option. No loss of tax revenue would be required.
Car companies are already inventing products to meet the European regulations so America can easily join in the demand.
The higher the demand. The higher the incentive to create more efficient models.
Getting the money for infrastructure will not be a problem because government regulation will foster the market.
The tax dis-incentive for gas is a great idea.
Also as Americans we have to at some point begin to realize that we are living in a greater world which requires a little more responsibility on our part. (and i do believe there are non-buddhist out there who do and take part in making the change.)
It does take time to change our world view but it’s possible and government mandates have a way of helping in the process. It has in the past.



report abuse
 

damaris

posted October 6, 2008 at 9:06 am


http://www.sciamearth3.com/natureorg/
Here’s a link for a free 1 month magazine to scientific american – Earth 3.0 issue



report abuse
 

Tony

posted October 6, 2008 at 10:48 am


Maybe it’s better to use miles per gallon as the qualifier (as proposed in the Obama energy plan), since a lot of gas cars still get better MPG than some hybrids.
This way, people driving the Escalade hybrid don’t get the tax break (since it’s only 20mpg), and less wealthy people who can’t afford hybrids still get encouragement in buying small/efficient cars.
Off the subject, but for anyone that hasn’t seen the all-electric Tesla Roadster:
http://www.teslamotors.com/



report abuse
 

golikewater

posted October 6, 2008 at 3:04 pm


I don’t know, something about encouraging masses of people to buy cars doesn’t feel like the right direction to me. How about tax incentives for people who get rid of their cars? Or tax incentives for investing in mass transit?



report abuse
 

Jerry Kolber

posted October 7, 2008 at 7:49 am


Tony – excellent point about MPG however my point is more about getting entirely away from fuels that require digging into the earth and moving as quickly as possible towards solar, hydro, and wind-derived solutions.
Golikewater – my point also is that getting people to give up their cars and use mass transit is a noble ideal but far from the reality of anything you can expect from most Americans whose lives are built around easy access to private, anytime travel (i.e. non-city dwellers). Barring a major cataclysm or total and fast re-engineering of the entire American suburban experience, the best bet is to try to get us into alternately fueled vehicles as a first step, no?



report abuse
 

pedro

posted October 7, 2008 at 1:28 pm


Government Regulation has never solved anything. More of it NEVER helps, it just costs more money.



report abuse
 

Greg Zwahlen

posted October 7, 2008 at 1:37 pm


Wall Street has been saying exactly that for years. So they got less regulation, and we see where that got us.



report abuse
 

damaris

posted October 7, 2008 at 2:48 pm


Government regulation that may have helped along the way.
Please check out.
The New Deal of 1933 and 1935
The Glass – Steagall Act 1933
The Fourteenth Amendment
The Nineteenth Amendment
The Civil Rights Act of 1964
Brown Vs Board of Ed
Roe vs Wade



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More blogs to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting One City. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Most Recent Buddhist Story By Beliefnet Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!

posted 2:29:05pm Aug. 27, 2012 | read full post »

Mixing technology and practice
There were many more good sessions at the Wisdom 2.0 conference this weekend. The intention of the organizers is to post videos. I'll let you know when. Here are some of my notes from a second panel. How do we use modern, social media technologies — such as this blog — to both further o

posted 3:54:40pm May. 02, 2010 | read full post »

Wisdom 2.0
If a zen master were sitting next to the chief technical officer of Twitter, what would they talk about? That sounds like a hypothetical overheared at a bar in San Francisco. But this weekend I saw the very thing at Soren Gordhamer's Wisdom 2.0 conference — named after his book of the same nam

posted 1:43:19pm May. 01, 2010 | read full post »

The Buddha at Work - "All we are is dust in the wind, dude."
"The only true wisdom consists of knowing that you know nothing." - Alex Winter, as Bill S. Preston, Esq. in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure"That's us, dude!" - Keanu Reeves, as Ted "Theodore" LoganWhoa! Excellent! I've had impermanence on my mind recently. I've talked about it her

posted 2:20:00pm Jan. 28, 2010 | read full post »

Sometimes You Find Enlightenment by Punching People in the Face
This week I'm curating a guest post from Jonathan Mead, a friend who inspires by living life on his own terms and sharing what he can with others.  To quote from Jonathan's own site, Illuminated Mind: "The reason for everything: To create a revolution based on authentic action. A social movemen

posted 12:32:23pm Jan. 27, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.