Driver ticketed for using biofuel

[zimv20]

Charlotte Observer (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/599471.html)


Vegetable oil sticks him with $1,000 fine

Bob Teixeira decided it was time to take a stand against U.S. dependence on foreign oil.
So last fall the Charlotte musician and guitar instructor spent $1,200 to convert his 1981 diesel Mercedes to run on vegetable oil. He bought soybean oil in 5-gallon jugs at Costco, spending about 30 percent more than diesel would cost.

His reward, from a state that heavily promotes alternative fuels: a $1,000 fine last month for not paying motor fuel taxes. He has been told to expect another $1,000 fine from the federal government.

To legally use veggie oil, state officials told him, he would have to first post a $2,500 bond.

Teixeira is one of a growing number of fuel-it-yourselfers -- backyard brewers who recycle restaurant grease or make moonshine for their car tanks. They do it to save money, reduce pollution or thumb their noses at oil sheiks.

They're also caught in a web of little-known state laws that can stifle energy independence.

State Sen. Stan Bingham, R-Denton, is known around Raleigh for his diesel Volkswagen fueled by used soybean oil. The car sports a "Goodbye, OPEC" sign.

"If somebody was going to go to this much trouble to drive around in a car that uses soybean oil, they ought to be exempt" from state taxes, he said.

The state Department of Revenue, which fined Teixeira, has asked legislators to waive the $2,500 bond for small fuel users. The department also told Teixeira, after the Observer asked about his case this week, that it will compromise on his fine.

But officials say they'll keep pursuing taxes on all fuels used in highway vehicles. With its 29.9-cent a gallon gas tax, the state collects $1.2 billion each year to pay for road construction.

"With the high cost of fuel right now, the department does recognize that a lot of people are looking for relief," said Reggie Little, assistant director of the motor fuel taxes division. "We're not here to hurt the small guy, we're just trying to make sure that the playing field is level."

(more)

good thing we're not trying to wean ourselves off foreign oil or anything like that. and using US-produced fuel in the process. i mean, that would be terrible!

[bartelby]

To be fair he was fined for not paying taxes, not for using biofuel.

[MACDRIVE]

His reward, from a state that heavily promotes alternative fuels: a $1,000 fine last month for not paying motor fuel taxes. He has been told to expect another $1,000 fine from the federal government.

TELL ME THAT'S NOT TRUE!!!

This story makes me mad as hell. :mad:

[atszyman]

To be fair he was fined for not paying taxes, not for using biofuel.

To be fair he was fined for not paying taxes on fuel he was not buying.

Don't get me wrong, he was using all the public roads which are kept in good shape via fuel taxes, but would this also happen if he were to buy a Chevy Volt (http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar/) or ride a bike on public streets?

What the state needs to do is look at the various vegitable oils available and see which ones could easily be used as auto fuel in this manner. Then talk to the producers of the oils and see if there would be a way to get mass quantities that are fuel grade but maybe not fit for cooking on the cheap and sell that as the auto fuel and tax it. With any luck it would be cheaper than what a person could buy at the store and would solve this problem.

Fining creative individuals for toying with alternative fuels is not a good way to break our oil dependency.

[Sdashiki]

Id like to see the law he broke, like the actual wording.

You buy gas, you pay tax.

You no buy gas, you no pay tax.


Its a fact that not everyone is going to switch to Biofuel of their own concoction; meaning its not taxed.

I think all the gas guzzlers on the road make up for his lack of taxation, which would probably be on the order of a few dollars at most.

Plus, he BOUGHT his oil, instead of making his own, so he did pay sales taxes...that is, if cooking oil is taxable...


ps: id not pay the fine and just fight it with a nice enviromental lawyer, sit back and watch the circus come to town.

[Swarmlord]

Id like to see the law he broke, like the actual wording.

You buy gas, you pay tax.

You no buy gas, you no pay tax.

<snip>

Glad I'm not the only one that saw it that way. This incident is rediculous. If anything they should have praised his innovativeness.

[bartelby]

Glad I'm not the only one that saw it that way. This incident is rediculous. If anything they should have praised his innovativeness.

What, and forego the tax dollars?

I do agree it's ridiculous to have to pay tax on biofuel.
When the whole "old chip oil as fuel" thing broke in the UK people were expected to pay tax on oil that had been used to cook chips (fries) in, which would otherwise been discarded.

[Turkish]

Next thing you know we'll be charged income tax on money we didn't earn.

[Rodimus Prime]

Id like to see the law he broke, like the actual wording.

You buy gas, you pay tax.

You no buy gas, you no pay tax.


Its a fact that not everyone is going to switch to Biofuel of their own concoction; meaning its not taxed.

I think all the gas guzzlers on the road make up for his lack of taxation, which would probably be on the order of a few dollars at most.

Plus, he BOUGHT his oil, instead of making his own, so he did pay sales taxes...that is, if cooking oil is taxable...


ps: id not pay the fine and just fight it with a nice enviromental lawyer, sit back and watch the circus come to town.

wow this one took a little while to come up here. I read the article last week and it was quite a bit more in depth. The law he broke was if you convert you car over to biofuel you have to pay a 2500 bond. This bond makes up for the fact you are not going to be gas tax. You are still using the public roads so you should help pay to maintain them. It is not fair to everyone else that he would be getting a free ride on the roads.
That being said the law was put in place not to hit the small users but to make commercial vehicles be force to pay for the damage the do to the roads and the wear and tear they cause since they are not paying fuel tax.

btw you could hire the lawyer and fight it but then you would be out the court cost, lawyer fees and fine. The law is rather crystal clear on it what he was doing wrong.

[Sdashiki]

That makes sense.

It truly does.

Yes, you use the roads, you should pay for them. $2500 seems reasonable, I guess.

But Id like a quick breakdown of the taxes of my gasoline per gallon. Over the life of this car (lets say 150,000 miles) how much gas taxes would I actually have paid over that time? Is it really going to be $2500? Maybe it is, maybe its not. Id like to know.

Though, on another end, people who pay taxes (federal, local etc) usually are paying for stuff they dont use.

Should someone with no children be putting into his local public education fund? Id say no, but I know that doesnt work.

Same idea though, right?

[Turkish]

The law he broke was if you convert you car over to biofuel you have to pay a 2500 bond. This bond makes up for the fact you are not going to be gas tax. You are still using the public roads so you should help pay to maintain them. It is not fair to everyone else that he would be getting a free ride on the roads.

So should people who drive fuel efficient vehicles have to pay a surcharge because they burn less fuel and in turn pay less tax?

[Rodimus Prime]

So should people who drive fuel efficient vehicles have to pay a surcharge because they burn less fuel and in turn pay less tax?

not because those care are also general lighter and do less damage to the roads.

I just stated the exact law he broke and the reason it was put in place.

[Sdashiki]

So should people who drive fuel efficient vehicles have to pay a surcharge because they burn less fuel and in turn pay less tax?

its not about fuel efficency its about taxation.

a gallon of gas has taxes that go towards road upkeep.

a gallon of biofuel is homemade/storebought and has no road taxes.

but both cars, the gas and biofuel, use the same roads.

[Rodimus Prime]

That makes sense.

It truly does.

Yes, you use the roads, you should pay for them. $2500 seems reasonable, I guess.

But Id like a quick breakdown of the taxes of my gasoline per gallon. Over the life of this car (lets say 150,000 miles) how much gas taxes would I actually have paid over that time? Is it really going to be $2500? Maybe it is, maybe its not. Id like to know.

Though, on another end, people who pay taxes (federal, local etc) usually are paying for stuff they dont use.

Should someone with no children be putting into his local public education fund? Id say no, but I know that doesnt work.

Same idea though, right?

not how tax work. I bet there are a lot of things you use every day that you did not pay your full share of the cost of it but it was the taxes that covered it. It the end it balances it out. Anything under Public the general public helps pay for. A lot of things would be impossible to pay for if only the users paid for it. For example Public heath care even though what the US has right now is poor it still cost a lot of money what it currenty takes to run and the users could not afford to pay for it so it falls on everyone else.

[yellow]

His reward, from a state that heavily promotes alternative fuels:

Say what?

Because they spent money to buy ONE bus with battery hybrids? I've never seen alternative fuel filling stations. And yet we have the highest gasoline tax in the southeast. $.31 per gallon!

[mkrishnan]

It's interesting that the story stated that he was identified during a check for unlawful fueling of recreational vehicles at an event... I was wondering about that part: it's not like anyone has ever asked to inspect the gas tank of my sedan!

Teixeira's story began near Lowe's Motor Speedway on May 14. As recreational vehicles streamed in for race week, revenue investigators were checking fuel tanks of diesel RVs for illegal fuel.

[Turkish]

not because those care are also general lighter and do less damage to the roads.

I just stated the exact law he broke and the reason it was put in place.

The law seems silly.

[atszyman]

Well I can understand that but the law is set-up wrong. The $2500 should be set up as a road use/vehicle inspection fee. After all if you modify your car it should be subject to a thorough inspection to verify that it is safe for you and other drivers. If pulled over at that point he could be ticketed for running a non-road-certified vehicle rather than for not paying taxes...

[Queso]

Next thing you know we'll be charged income tax on money we didn't earn.
We sort of already do in the UK, or at least on money we haven't earned yet. Us company directors have to pay tax for the upcoming year in advance :rolleyes:

[Swarmlord]

This whole argument about his not paying a tax rubs me the wrong way. Are we going to start applying taxes to extremely frugal vehicles because they don't use enough gas and therefore pay enough tax?

In the states here, fuel taxes are only one piece of the taxation pie. We pay registration fees, there's wheel tax, tax on tires sold, emissions test fees etc. All pay for roads, highway patrol etc. and are paid on all vehicles no matter what fuel they use.

The tax on gas is just that - a tax on petrofuel. Diesel has a different tax, propane has it's own tax and so on. Sounds like government is irritated when someone finds a way to use a food product as fuel and they haven't figured out a way to apply a per gallon tax to it.

[leekohler]

Glad to see more people getting away from fossil fuels. This behavior should be encouraged, not discouraged. After this, no one can tell me we absolutely "need" foreign oil. If one person can convert a diesel engine to run on vegetable oil, surely the entire auto industry could do the same.

[Rodimus Prime]

The law seems silly.

You have to remember why the law was set up. It was not set up to target small users but to make sure commercial vehicle paid there taxes for road use since they were not paying gas tax.

If you read though it they are not trying to get a bill though to exempt small users (aka home) from having to pay the 2500.
I do not think commercial vehicles should be exempted from it and they should pay the 2500. Remember they general do a lot of miles on the road.

[Rodimus Prime]

This whole argument about his not paying a tax rubs me the wrong way. Are we going to start applying taxes to extremely frugal vehicles because they don't use enough gas and therefore pay enough tax?

In the states here, fuel taxes are only one piece of the taxation pie. We pay registration fees, there's wheel tax, tax on tires sold, emissions test fees etc. All pay for roads, highway patrol etc. and are paid on all vehicles no matter what fuel they use.

The tax on gas is just that - a tax on petrofuel. Diesel has a different tax, propane has it's own tax and so on. Sounds like government is irritated when someone finds a way to use a food product as fuel and they haven't figured out a way to apply a per gallon tax to it.

fuel tax is also the by far the largest cut of the pie. That emission testing fee goes to the placing doing the test to help recover the cost of the equirpment which is around 10 or 50k depending on what type you get. Auto Registration fee is pretty low compared the amount the gas tax brings in per vechical. Tires is well pennies ect. over 1/2 the pie is more than likely gas.

[iMeowbot]

The fine here was pretty nasty. There is something really screwy about that $2500 bond requirement, because ultimately the tax liability for an independent user of alternative fuel in Virginia (that is, someone who acquires alternative fuel that hasn't already been taxed that way) is only $50 a year! (http://www.policylibrary.tax.virginia.gov/OTP/Policy.nsf/ccd0d2ea93db9ba485256968006a39ed/b49b65337599ada985256a010078de58?OpenDocument) Someone didn't quite think things through.

[emw]

To think we'll ever make sense of the taxation schemes currently in place is probably not realistic ;)

Governments are always looking for ways to fill the coffers, sometimes through things that at least seem legitimate, and other times through things that don't. In most cases they use a very broad brush to paint the tax law, and as such don't think about the potential "exceptions" to the rule cases, such as this.

I agree we should be paying some sort of fee/tax for road maintenance, and that those that use alternative fuels should in some way help to bear the burden of that cost. However, the means to calculate that tax will likely never insure that everyone pays a "fair share" of their maintenance costs.

But Id like a quick breakdown of the taxes of my gasoline per gallon. Over the life of this car (lets say 150,000 miles) how much gas taxes would I actually have paid over that time? Is it really going to be $2500? Maybe it is, maybe its not. Id like to know.If you averaged 20 miles per gallon for that 150K miles, you'd have paid about $2250 in taxes based on the 29.9 cent per gallon levied by that state.

[Sdashiki]

Does everyone agree you need money to pay for roads?

Does everyone agree you need to tax users of the roads to get this money?

Does everyone agree that 99&#37; of users are fueled by taxed-gasoline?

Does everyone agree that the remaining % of users should also pay for roads?

Does everyone agree that the only way to do this is by a levying a cost to owning a biofuel vehicle?

Does everyone agree this has NOTHING to do with Big-Oil and greed, but pure economics?


good. :D cuz life aint fair, but they sure do try.

[takao]

what if he used a wood gas generator to power his vehicle ? would they tax him too for using wood ?


that said around here it's called "mineral oil tax" and only applies to exactly those

[iMeowbot]

what if he used a wood gas generator to power his vehicle ? would they tax him too for using wood ?
Yep. (http://www.policylibrary.tax.virginia.gov/OTP/Policy.nsf/ccd0d2ea93db9ba485256968006a39ed/2ed4a590903c30b385256a01007eaa58?OpenDocument) In Virginia, "'Alternative fuel' means a combustible gas, liquid or other energy source that can be used to generate power to operate a highway vehicle and that is not a motor fuel."

[takao]

Yep. (http://www.policylibrary.tax.virginia.gov/OTP/Policy.nsf/ccd0d2ea93db9ba485256968006a39ed/2ed4a590903c30b385256a01007eaa58?OpenDocument) In Virginia, "'Alternative fuel' means a combustible gas, liquid or other energy source that can be used to generate power to operate a highway vehicle and that is not a motor fuel."

"Highway" means every way or place of whatever nature open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel in the Commonwealth, including the streets and alleys in towns and cities.

"Highway vehicle" means a self-propelled vehicle designed for use on a highway.

going by the definitions isn't driving a bike also taxable after all you use the energy source "food" by your body to power a vehicle ?

[nbs2]

Glad to see more people getting away from fossil fuels. This behavior should be encouraged, not discouraged. After this, no one can tell me we absolutely "need" foreign oil. If one person can convert a diesel engine to run on vegetable oil, surely the entire auto industry could do the same.

Not an exact answer, but switching to vegetable oil on a mass scale would destroy the American economy. The problem is that switching on that scale would increase demand on the base materials so much, that crop supplies would not be able to keep up. Both the cost of food and the cost of gas would skyrocket as demand continually outpaced supply. You'd have the problem the Mexicans are having, only greater. There, it's primarily the poor who are getting squeezed as the price of corn (and thus the tortillas that make up a significant portion of their diet) is rising as crops are being shifted to fuel. If it was done on a mass scale - we'd all suffer. So, we don't NEED foreign oil, but dumping oil does have its dangers.

"Highway" means every way or place of whatever nature open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel in the Commonwealth, including the streets and alleys in towns and cities.

"Highway vehicle" means a self-propelled vehicle designed for use on a highway.

going by the definitions isn't driving a bike also taxable after all you use the energy source "food" by your body to power a vehicle ?

Bikes aren't designed for use on a "every way or place of whatever nature open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel in the Commonwealth, including the streets and alleys in towns and cities." You can use them on some roads, but not on the freeways - a highway vehicle can be used on all roads.

[yellow]

Does everyone agree you need money to pay for roads?

Does everyone agree you need to tax users of the roads to get this money?

Does everyone agree that 99&#37; of users are fueled by taxed-gasoline?

Does everyone agree that the remaining % of users should also pay for roads?

Does everyone agree that the only way to do this is by a levying a cost to owning a biofuel vehicle?

Oh, you mean the $15,000,000 for a 10 mile stretch of I-40 that I'm helping subsidise AGAIN?

http://www.wral.com/traffic/story/1108397/

I-40 Pavement Flaws Led to Changes at DOT
Posted: Dec. 15, 2006
Updated: May. 19, 2007

Three highway engineers have been reprimanded in the wake of a botched paving job on Interstate 40 that will cost the state more than $18 million to repair.

Transportation Secretary Lyndo Tippett on Friday issued his final report into flawed pavement on a 10-mile stretch of I-40 in Durham County. Within months of a major widening project, pavement began crumbling on the highway between the Durham Freeway and U.S. Highway 15/501.

Inspectors determined that expansion joints weren't installed properly when a new layer of concrete was laid over I-40 during the widening. Tippett said in his report that the expansion joints fell through the cracks because of shifting responsibilities within the Department of Transportation and contractors, badly written contracts and a lack of on-site inspection.

Granite Construction Co., the contractor on the widening project, agreed to absorb $3 million of the cost to fix the pavement, and the DOT plans to take legal action against HNTB, an engineering firm that the state hired to inspect the I-40 widening, Tippett said. HNTB has denied any responsibility for the problem, he said.

DOT engineers Victor Barbour, Wiley Jones III and Tracy Parrott received written warnings for their involvement in the project, Tippett said. State Highway Administrator Len Sanderson decided to retire at the end of the year.

Tippett said the DOT would implement new controls to prevent future problems in the future, including more on-site inspections by senior engineers and requiring contractors to provide performance warranties.

Frankly, I'm tired of paying so much money for so much traffic and such poor roads. There was a budget surplus of $2,000,000,000 last year and yet I still have to pay so much tax at the pump? They are considering a toll road on I-540? They had to finally integrate a lottery in the state to get education revenue up?

Things do not add up.

[elfin buddy]

Next thing you know we'll be charged income tax on money we didn't earn.

Heh, Revenue Canada already tried that one on me. It went something like this:

Me: I'm reporting $7500 as my taxable income for 2004. [gives T4 slips as proof]

Revenue Canada: We think you earned $16000. You now owe us $800 in taxes plus interest for the last two years. Don't argue, just pay.

Me: :(

[Sdashiki]

Anyone who complains about paying for roadwork in their state doesnt live in Massachusetts.

For those of you living under a rock for the last decade and a half, let me enlighten you a bit.

"The Big Dig" is a public works project taking place in downtown boston and the outlying areas. It has taken more than $14 billion dollars. And is at least $4 billion over budget.

In middle school we took a trip to see the planning stages. Lots of fancy charts and posters, but no work yet. We were told when we graduate from high school, it would be done. Its now 15 years later.

Every single person who lives in MA, is paying for The Big Dig.

Property taxes rose.
Gas taxes rose.
Toll prices rose.
Cigarette taxes rose.

basically, Taxachusetts has some real meaning for the nickname.

Whether you commute or live in Boston doesnt matter, you are paying for this project. And you may NEVER even use any part of it.

MITT ROMNEY FOR PRESIDENT!



Second state: Florida
Location: Orlando

the 408 roadway.

if you are going to Orlando from the north, you are going to stop every 3 minutes and pay another toll. it can cost almost $10 to go from the Turnpike, also not free of course, to downtown Orlando and beyond.

why?

because long ago Orlando was offered millions in federal funding for public highways. they said, "Nah, we cool".

So when Orlando did need a road from the Turnpike to Orlando, they had to pay for it themselves.

Which sort of makes sense. Only people who ride the road pay, unlike the statewide taxation of The Big Dig.

[gkarris]

A tax to use the roads is a tax to use the roads.

I assume that states will start taxing alternative fuel sources. (ooh, what about Hybrid cars?).

(waits for a tax for using digital satellite (cable TV users are taxed) - why not start taxing outer space?)

[Rodimus Prime]

A tax to use the roads is a tax to use the roads.

I assume that states will start taxing alternative fuel sources. (ooh, what about Hybrid cars?).

(waits for a tax for using digital satellite (cable TV users are taxed) - why not start taxing outer space?)

For the first one hybrid cars they are looking for way to balance out the taxes. One choose was to remove gas tax and require all cars to have a box that logs miles and you are tax so much for each mile you drive. But that would have to much of a big brother approach.

As for the satellite TV one cable companies have been fighting for either the sat companies to be taxed for the tax on them to be removed to make composition fairer

[Swarmlord]

For the first one hybrid cars they are looking for way to balance out the taxes. One choose was to remove gas tax and require all cars to have a box that logs miles and you are tax so much for each mile you drive. But that would have to much of a big brother approach.

As for the satellite TV one cable companies have been fighting for either the sat companies to be taxed for the tax on them to be removed to make composition fairer

Instead of concentrating on who's paying for the road maintenance cost, I like to look at it as rewarding (the carrot) those that use the least fossil fuels and penalize those that use the most (the stick).

If through some miracle, so many people moved to alternative fuels that budget for road maintenance became an issue, then they could analyze how best to pay for it.

Dinging someone for being innovative and eliminating their use of fossil fuels isn't the way to solve our energy dependence problem.

[emw]

Which sort of makes sense. Only people who ride the road pay, unlike the statewide taxation of The Big Dig.With any tax, some amount goes to fund one program or another that the person paying the tax doesn't utilize.

I can't imagine I take advantage of or benefit from every government service that is out there; road tax is just the most visible, since it's obvious whether or not you actually drive on the Big Dig, for example.

Toll Roads, though they technically "tax" those that use the roads, are not ideal either. For example, in Chicago many expressways are tollways, but those who don't drive on them benefit from them as well. For example, if the Northwest Tollway was non-existent, everyone would cram onto 72, or 68, or any number of other smaller roads, clogging city streets and making commuting a nightmare. So even though I don't generally use the tollway to get to work, it being there makes my life a lot better.

The issue for me isn't so much that we're taxed to pay for programs we don't utilize - a "use tax" on everything would simply be much too complicated and would likely leave necessary programs severely underfunded because those that use them couldn't afford them - it's that the taxes that we do pay are wasted on too many useless or poorly run projects (see yellow's post, or the Big Dig as examples).

[pseudobrit]

That makes sense.

It truly does.

Yes, you use the roads, you should pay for them. $2500 seems reasonable, I guess.

I own a bicycle and pay nothing extra for riding it on the roads. Neither do the Amish who pass me in the opposite lane.

But Id like a quick breakdown of the taxes of my gasoline per gallon. Over the life of this car (lets say 150,000 miles) how much gas taxes would I actually have paid over that time? Is it really going to be $2500? Maybe it is, maybe its not. Id like to know.

Going through some quick math using DOE pricing info, at $.49/gallon for tax, my car (a turbodiesel as well) went through 1496 gallons of fuel over 66,000 miles, meaning I paid a little over $700 in fuel taxes over the past four and a half years.

So let's drop the ******** and get real here. This makes no sense. $2500 is a ****ing insane amount of a penalty to pay for accidentally "stealing" $100 in fuel tax.

If the government is that upset about it, they can mentally subtract the amount of gasoline purchased at retail stations – with road taxes included in the price – going into lawnmowers, string trimmers and snowblowers. Because whatever that windfall might be, one thing for sure is that it sure as Hell outweighs the deficit created by a handful of rogue dervs.

its not about fuel efficency its about taxation.

a gallon of gas has taxes that go towards road upkeep.

a gallon of biofuel is homemade/storebought and has no road taxes.

but both cars, the gas and biofuel, use the same roads.

Let's bust this one wide open too. Probably 95&#37; of the wear to roads and highways comes from heavy multiaxle trucks. So while everyone uses the same roads, only a small percentage of users (who are largely corporations or working for them) are using the roads in a way that requires major capital investment on a regular basis. And we all pay the same rate on the fuel we use whether we're driving in a 3000 lb Volkswagen the road doesn't notice or a 70,000 lb dump truck digging ruts in the surface every day.

[Cassie]

TELL ME THAT'S NOT TRUE!!!

This story makes me mad as hell. :mad:

Ditto.:mad: Why are we fining people for reducing pollution?! This is total BS.

I guess If that were to happen to me, I'd go buy a gallon of gas and say "Here's your damn oil tax!"

[Rodimus Prime]

Let's bust this one wide open too. Probably 95% of the wear to roads and highways comes from heavy multiaxle trucks. So while everyone uses the same roads, only a small percentage of users (who are largely corporations or working for them) are using the roads in a way that requires major capital investment on a regular basis. And we all pay the same rate on the fuel we use whether we're driving in a 3000 lb Volkswagen the road doesn't notice or a 70,000 lb dump truck digging ruts in the surface every day.

Hate to break it to you but the small cars cause most of the wear and tear on the roads not the large trucks. Reason being is cars just drive a lot more miles total per year. Yes they do less damage each mile but when you relieze that most of the miles belong to the cars. Also the wear to the road depends heavily on how many axles the vechical has as well. More axis less wear on the for the weight.

Also if you read the entire artical you will learn that the $2500 was there to target comerical vechicals not the small users and this is really the first tiem a small users has gotten cough under it and now they are trying to get a law passed that exempts the small users.

[zimv20]

Hate to break it to you but the small cars cause most of the wear and tear on the roads not the large trucks. Reason being is cars just drive a lot more miles total per year. Yes they do less damage each mile but when you relieze that most of the miles belong to the cars. Also the wear to the road depends heavily on how many axles the vechical has as well. More axis less wear on the for the weight.

link(s), please. i'd like to see data on all this.

[obeygiant]

Is it true that the more biofuels we use, the more expensive food will get? Or is it just a scare tactic?

[Ugg]

Is it true that the more biofuels we use, the more expensive food will get? Or is it just a scare tactic?

I've read somewhere recently that the total acreage devoted to corn increased by a huge amount this year, in the US anyway. The increase was due to the growing market for ethanol.

In this case, since corn is almost exclusively grown as animal feed, meat prices could see an increase. Since corn can't be grown profitably in most of the western US, it's not really a huge problem but if biofuel production increases by some massive amount, you'll see a lot of farmers seriously considering growing for the biofuel market as opposed to the food market. Given the rate of ethanol plant construction, it could be a serious problem a few years down the road.

I'd like to see ag subsidies dropped for those who sell their crops for biofuel. Why subsidize them twice?

[Rodimus Prime]

link(s), please. i'd like to see data on all this.

It is from my college text book for the formals and it also from my transportation class I took last semesters so a little lacking on the links. Also my text book I had is oh about 1500miles away from my current location. Plus anything I could find would be so far over your head you would not have a hope of understanding it.

Everything is converted to 18kip loads just and the factor for cars was fairly small but they are I believe 80+% of the mile drive each year is by cars so do the math. That many cars adds up.

[zimv20]

Plus anything I could find would be so far over your head you would not have a hope of understanding it.
gee, thanks. i guess my degree in science and running a successful company don't count for anything, huh?

[obeygiant]

Plus anything I could find would be so far over your head you would not have a hope of understanding it.


Yeah, tell me about it. :)

But I think roads get damaged no matter what drives on them. Things always wear out.

[Ugg]

Hate to break it to you but the small cars cause most of the wear and tear on the roads not the large trucks. Reason being is cars just drive a lot more miles total per year. Yes they do less damage each mile but when you relieze that most of the miles belong to the cars. Also the wear to the road depends heavily on how many axles the vechical has as well. More axis less wear on the for the weight..

Axis of ?

I'd like to see that broken down into road surface type. I see an awful lot of secondary roads that are torn to bits, and it sure can't be from a herd of Prius.

For someone who claims to know more than most mere mortals, you certainly have poor spelling.

[pseudobrit]

Hate to break it to you but the small cars cause most of the wear and tear on the roads not the large trucks. Reason being is cars just drive a lot more miles total per year. Yes they do less damage each mile but when you relieze that most of the miles belong to the cars. Also the wear to the road depends heavily on how many axles the vechical has as well. More axis less wear on the for the weight.

You're wrong.

I live near very rural areas. There's a landfill out of the way and the main road leading to it was rutted so badly they recently had to repave it. We're talking like 8" of a wave here.
Past the landfill heading south, where the trucks don't go the road hasn't been resurfaced in over a decade. I could show you the ruts on the highways at a traffic light where heavy truck traffic has completely destroyed a relatively fresh road surface.

[zimv20]

Past the landfill heading south, where the trucks don't go the road hasn't been resurfaced in over a decade. I could show you the ruts on the highways at a traffic light where heavy truck traffic has completely destroyed a relatively fresh road surface.
no, you're wrong, p'brit. forget your evidence, you're so far in over your head, you just don't understand, and only rodius can drop in and save us.

please spare us the embarrassment of your counterexamples. oh -- and if you want to get into His good graces, you should muck up your spelling some.

[pseudobrit]

no, you're wrong, p'brit. forget your evidence, you're so far in over your head, you just don't understand, and only rodius can drop in and save us.

please spare us the embarrassment of your counterexamples. oh -- and if you want to get into His good graces, you should muck up your spelling some.

Can anyone loan me a college textbook? I hear they can be a good shoehorn with which to wedge my head up my ass.

[Rodimus Prime]

You're wrong.

I live near very rural areas. There's a landfill out of the way and the main road leading to it was rutted so badly they recently had to repave it. We're talking like 8" of a wave here.
Past the landfill heading south, where the trucks don't go the road hasn't been resurfaced in over a decade. I could show you the ruts on the highways at a traffic light where heavy truck traffic has completely destroyed a relatively fresh road surface.

The the roads where poorly design. Roads do have a max weight limit on them and going over it will cause the rutted damage.

A highway (which is designed to take the heavier loads) is worn out more by the cars than the trucks.

[pseudobrit]

A highway (which is designed to take the heavier loads) is worn out more by the cars than the trucks.

And of all the miles of road in the U.S., how many are of Interstate "heavy load" grade able to withstand the pounding?

[Ugg]

The the roads where poorly design. Roads do have a max weight limit on them and going over it will cause the rutted damage.

A highway (which is designed to take the heavier loads) is worn out more by the cars than the trucks.

Let's have a breakdown then of how many miles of non highway roads are able to withstand heavier loads. Probably not that many, right?

Your blanket statements about the subject haven't given me much faith in your expertise.

[Willis]

similar story here...

You can use Veg oil to run your diesel car... and it will cost around 2-3p/Litre... (current fuel prices are 95.9p/litre) however, you have to tell the tax man!! and he adds on ~23p/litre

ok, we're still being taxed... but, its cleaner and a damn sight cheaper!

[Fearless Leader]

This is sad.

But anyways the only reason for biofuel is to reduce foreign fuel dependency.

The problem with biofuels is that CO2 is still there. Petrol / Ethanol / Alcohol / Coal / any organic substance is that when it is burned it releases the CO2.

[takao]

Everything is converted to 18kip loads just and the factor for cars was fairly small but they are I believe 80+% of the mile drive each year is by cars so do the math. That many cars adds up.

funny how around here they have to replace the surface of the highway every three years thanks to the transit traffic consisting mostly of trucks
while meanwhile on the mostly car covered highways in vienna it's more like 7 years or even more

[jdechko]

Glad to see more people getting away from fossil fuels. This behavior should be encouraged, not discouraged. After this, no one can tell me we absolutely "need" foreign oil. If one person can convert a diesel engine to run on vegetable oil, surely the entire auto industry could do the same.

True, but at the same time, it would suck for corn prices to skyrocket (through both taxation and the laws of supply & demand) just because ethanol becomes a more widely used fuel source. Likewise with biodiesel - vegetable oil prices (most likely) would see an increase due to the same reasons.

I think the key would be fuel diversity. If half the cars used fossil fuels, and the remaining half used either ethanol, other bio-fuels, hydrogen, electricity or some other alternative fuel, we'd see a decreased dependence (and hopefully consumption) on fossil fuels, and the prices / taxes wouldn't require some people to take out second jobs.

[Desertrat]

Look, the guy wasn't fined for using biofuel. He was fined for evading road-use taxes. Same deal as a farmer or rancher who uses tax-free "red diesel" in his highway vehicle instead of an on-farm/ranch vehicle. In his defense, the guy may well not have known he was doing anything wrong.

The "gasoline tax" is collected via gasoline sales, but it's more accurately described as a road use fee: Paying for past and future construction, plus maintenance. It's presently inadequate for the purpose, so additional funds come from general revenue taxes.

The most road damage is from semis, which pay the highest in license plate fees as well as the taxes on their fuel. 5mpg means lots of fuel tax. For me to license my single-axle dump truck would be $1,000 a year, so semis gotta be a bunch more...

Gasahol is a current fad, benefitting some farmers and ADM. It's already driven corn up to $3.64 a bushel, from $2. That's led to some food riots in Mexico, which means more of them coming north. Our food prices are rising, mostly meats, milk, eggs and Post Toasties/Fritos. More downsides include a loss of habitat for wildlife and further depletion of the Ogallala Aqufer. Anyway, at $4/bushel, the profit for alcohol producers is $0.04/gallon, which won't pay off the investment capital--which is why new plant construction is on hold.

'Rat

[solvs]

Plus anything I could find would be so far over your head you would not have a hope of understanding it.
You better be joking, or prepared to be mercilessly mocked for such a statement. :p

no, you're wrong, p'brit. forget your evidence, you're so far in over your head, you just don't understand, and only rodius can drop in and save us.
It's Rodimus. Though why anyone would want to name themselves after the worst Transformer EVER I'll never know. (sorry, geek alert) I'll never forgive him for getting Optimus killed. :mad:

Yeah, tell me about it.
I'm surprised you didn't just tell him no one cared about what he said the way you do to me when you don't understand what I'm saying after I've posted a big long run on sentence proving you wrong. ;)