Paris To Test Banning SUVs In the City 509
thecarchik writes "Paris may be the first city to experiment with such a policy. Next year, it will begin to test restrictions on vehicles that emit more than a certain amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) per kilometer — the measure of a car's contribution to greenhouse gases. An official within the Parisian mayor's office, Denis Baupin, identified older diesel-engined cars and sport-utility vehicles as specific targets of the emissions limit. Residents and travelers have responded by buying thousands of electric cars, including the low-speed fiberglass G-Wiz — despite major safety concerns with the vehicle."
Re:Weather Alert (Score:5, Informative)
IIRC, paris/france gets most of its energy from nuclear power. So limited upstream pollution.
Not new. (Score:5, Informative)
G-Wiz (Score:3, Informative)
That's a completely useless article. There's basically no meaningful information until a footnote at the end that it's a rebadged, Indian made Reva.
Re:Weather Alert (Score:5, Informative)
with a gas fueled car, when the saudis decide you are paying $5/ gallon so they can send more money to islamic militant causes, you have no choice.
If you're American, surely you mean 'when the Canadians decide you are paying $5/gallon so they can send more money to hockey teams and French speaking welfare cases'?
You do realise that America gets twice as much oil from Canada as from Saudi, right?
No, I guess not.
Re:Weather Alert (Score:5, Informative)
The big issue is that Paris sits in a river basin. On days without enough wind, the smog just sits over the city. It's pretty gnarly. Moving the pollution anywhere else is a big win because it becomes less localized, and impacts less people.
A very strange piece of news (Score:5, Informative)
As a French man, reading the news every day, and living quite close to Paris, I've never heard about such a ban. neither have I heard about "thousands of electric vehicles" being suddenly bought by Paris' residents. Right now, French people are more interested in the end of the "prime à la casse", which is a financial bonus given for buying low emission vehicles, but we're talking gas powered cars, electric cars are nowhere to be seen on french roads and cities.
Paris planned innovation is a system of shared self-service cars (probably electric), which can be used for a few hours for a moderate cost, similar to what has existed for years for bicycles ('vélib', this has been a major success for Paris' mayor).
And how many SUV's carry 6 people to work? (Score:5, Informative)
Really, show me ONE SUV that actually uses its space for the work commute. Oh okay, so you found one in ALL of France, big whoop. But I think that Americans just can't grasp the problem. Europe is SMALLER en the cities are just not designed with big cars in mind. For that matter most Europeans just don't get the American road system. The two areas work at a totally different scale. For instance, my own commute takes about 45 minutes... by bicycle, car OR train. Really. The travel time is NOT in the distance but in the waiting. The car gets stuck in all kinds of traffic jams, the train suffers delays on one of the most crowded rail networks in the world and of course you got to get to and from the train station by a bus service that doesn't connect and the bicycle... actually that one is pretty good a very straight line with just one big pothole with no lights around it.
And SUV's are not just another car. Forget for a moment the type of driver inside of them who tend to be major assholes, two SUV's passing each other in a narrow street, and old european cities are nothing but narrow streets, and the cars typically slow down to pass each other. They take just that bit more space say a meter in a bumper to bumper traffic jams. 4 SUV's and you could have fitted a whole extra car in the extra space taken by a SUV. Parking is the same. The drivers feel safer so take more risks, not only does this make the risk similar again but the death toll on pedestrians and cyclist increases thanks to the SUV driver.
London had the congestion charging and despite that fact that it was universally hated (or so the popular press tell us) it worked. The difference is staggering. But it wasn't popular. ANY law will have opponents. If you try to find a way to get anything done that won't upset anyone, you will never get anything done and THAT will REALLY upset people.
You just want an excuse, because ONE SUV was once found to actually have a full load for a work commute, ALL SUV's should be allowed to drive with one person in congested city centers totally unfit for such large cars. NIMBY must be your middle name.
Oh and a congestion tax would also hit low pollution vehicles. So if I drive a small electric car filled with passengers I get to pay the same as a SUV with just the driver. SMART!
Re:Weather Alert (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html [doe.gov]
Sneak peak:
The top five sources of US crude oil imports for September were Canada (1,936 thousand barrels per day), Nigeria (1,107 thousand barrels per day), Mexico (1,098 thousand barrels per day), Saudi Arabia (1,082 thousand barrels per day), and Venezuela (919 thousand barrels per day). The rest of the top ten sources, in order, were Iraq (422 thousand barrels per day), Angola (404 thousand barrels per day), Algeria (366 thousand barrels per day), Colombia (308 thousand barrels per day), and Russia (236 thousand barrels per day).
September 2010 Import Highlights: Released November 29, 2010
Re:What class of SUV? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Weather Alert (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Bad Idea (Score:5, Informative)
The vast majority of CO2 emissions from cars come from driving them, not manufacturing them.
See for instance page 4 of this report:
http://www.pacinst.org/topics/integrity_of_science/case_studies/hummer_vs_prius.pdf [pacinst.org]
Electric Mail Wagons In Paris -- 1905 (Score:5, Informative)
From Popular Mechanics magazine, January 1905 [google.com], p. 119:
Many of the mail wagons in Paris are now electric-propelled vehicles, weighing 4,200 pounds, and carry a load of 1,100 pounds of mail. Storage batteries weighing 1,320 pounds furnish current sufficient to last for a 37-mile trip. The Motor Age says the new wagons carry twice as much mail as the former horse-drawn vehicles and travel much faster.
Re:Not new. (Score:5, Informative)
Just as Italians would use the word "Londra" for London, using "Firenze" instead of "Florence" when writing English is both incorrect and pretentious.
so i assume it's very pretentious to not be a native english speaker?
I'm sorry that we don't know every single english name of towns around the world, i would have also used Firenze while writing english, since that's the only name i know for that town.
Re:Weather Alert (Score:3, Informative)
Well, they must be getting their energy from somewhere, unless France is blacked out. I have been to coal plants, wind farms and hydro plants and I have seen turbines being serviced at each of them, it is just a reality of power generation that a boiler or a cooling tower needs to be cleaned or a turbine or dynamo needs to be repaired from time to time. Unless France has been secretly building coal or hydro stations over the last few years or has been buying an inordinate amount of foreign power, I suspect the slack is being taken up by other nuclear plants.
Re:What class of SUV? (Score:4, Informative)
And no, there isn't any rush for electric car yet here, there are some Toyota Pryus Hybrids, mainly cabs, nothing much.
sources : leparisien.fr [googleusercontent.com], AFP [google.fr]
Re:How much carbon ... (Score:5, Informative)
Regular commute outside the main train/bus routes?? Have you *ever* been to Paris? :P You'd be hard pressed to find a route not covered by metro or RER, not to mention buses..
Re:Safety (Score:2, Informative)
Stop your backwards thinking! Ban the SUV so they don't kill people in smaller cars, maybe??
If you think that SUVs are safe, how about examples of their safety with,
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/5695732.html
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/238883/amtrak_train_hits_suv_kills_6.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGofMZ7roxs
SUVs and trucks driven for "safety" *cause* the deathtolls on the roads we see today. Ban them and you'll see more people living.
But if we escalate your thinking process, why not upgrade to Armored Personnel Carrier? Must be safer? Until you crash with another one at 70km/h, then you dead.
Re:Safety (Score:3, Informative)
I've seen two fatal road accidents, and one injury accident in the last ten years. All three involved children, all three involved SUVs.
In the case of the two fatalities, the SUV driver was confident that the power and weight of their vehicle would let them do things that other road users weren't risking; it turns out that even a 3-ton SUV is going to lose against a 40-odd ton truck.
In the case of the injury, it was even simpler; the kid did something stupid (ran in front of their parent's vehicle, not behind it, to cross to the shop opposite their school), got hit at relatively low speeds (about 10 mph), and instead of going over the car (seen that, too, with a Lexus IS - quite survivable by the size of kids in question, who were merely shocked), went under the wheels (Range Rover). The resulting injuries needed hospital treatment.
As to the two fatalities? Fatality one was caused when two big rigs on a 3-lane highway hadn't seen each other and decided to signal to change lanes, the one on the left moving right, the one on the right moving left. The rest of us dropped back - you do not want to be next to a big rig when it's in a crash. The SUV driver went round the traffic that had dropped back, and tried to overtake - they nearly made it, but got hit by one of the big rigs. The SUV was crushed against the central reservation, then driven over by the rig that hit it. Result? Two adults declared dead on the scene, their child declared dead before I'd finished giving my statement of what I'd seen to the police.
The second was in icy conditions, climbing a hill with (again) big rigs coming down towards us. The SUV decided to try and overtake, lost control, span onto the other side of the road, and got hit in the side by a big rig. The resulting damage meant that people on the side that was hit were killed (possibly at time of impact, possibly when the SUV rolled and then slid on the damaged side), but people on the other side of the vehicle were OK.
You will notice a pattern to the serious incidents; someone does something stupid, and an accident ensues. In the two fatal cases, a better driver wouldn't have been involved in the first place; for the first of the two, they'd have observed that the trucks were signalling stupid plans, and that everyone else was dropping back, for the second, they'd have noted the icy conditions, and decided to take a bit longer rather than overtake when there's traffic coming downhill. I find myself wondering whether the sense that the SUV would protect them encouraged these drivers to take risks that they just wouldn't risk in a smaller car; if it did, it cost them dearly.
In the injury case, there wasn't that much the driver could do - similar accidents occurred at that spot about once every three months, as there was a school on one side of the road, and a shop on the other. Kids dropped off at school sometimes decided to go to the shop instead; if the kid was especially distracted, or especially foolish, they'd dart just in front of the car that just dropped them off. Result is one accident - small vehicles like the Lexus IS throw the kid over the bonnet, and there are no injuries, just a seriously terrified kid and parent. SUVs force the kids under the car, and if the wheels get them, it's serious injury time.
My conclusion? If you're buying an SUV to "keep the kids safe", you're better off spending the difference in price between a car and an SUV on advanced driving lessons; learn to read the road, and make better judgement calls. You're better off with half the chance of being in an accident, and a 25% higher chance of someone dying in the accident than you are with a slightly lower chance of someone dying in the accident, but twice the odds of being in an accident in the first place.
Further, it's worth thinking about the bumps and scrapes you've actually been in - if your experience is that you're regularly in high speed crashes involving other vehicles, but never in incidents where the collision sp
Re:How much carbon ... (Score:5, Informative)
When how is that a problem?
They can do like lot of people do: They can use their car to reach the nearest train station and from there, use trains/RER/subways/buses etc. TFA doesn't state that SUV will be banned outside of Paris too.
On a side note, I live near Paris, I work in Paris. I don't have a car, and that's fine.
I'm not saying that car is bad. When you have to move furniture, or stuff, or in some other situations, car might actually be the wise choice.
But, from my experience, that's not how it's used. There are like 9 out of 10 cars used for only driving 1 person. And that's sad. I'm breathing this air.
So when it comes to diminution pollution, i'm all for it.
Re:How much carbon ... (Score:2, Informative)
"people with regular commute outside main train/bus routes?"
See, that's the thing. I don't think such places *exist* in Paris. It has a proper transit system.
And as for your list, I suspect that people with genuine industrial/commercial needs can use a plain old truck (I've seen plenty of those in Paris), and families with more than one small child per adult can either muster their family troop on the transit system (bus or rail -- I saw plenty of examples of that in Paris too), or buy another type of vehicle. SUVs are an inefficient way to do it. I don't understand why people who are handicapped would need an SUV. Most of the people I know that have to transport wheelchairs just use regular cars or a van, modified with different controls and to make handling the wheelchair easier. The height of a typical SUV isn't ideal for that purpose.
Get over SUVs. They are a car that wants to be a truck, or a truck that wants to be a car -- a bad design that fuses the undesirable aspects of one (poor fuel economy and large size) with the other, for reasons that have more to do with human psychology than anything practical.
Re:Weather Alert (Score:4, Informative)
A cyclist is under no such illusion
The cyclists certainly are where I live (Vancouver, Canada). Every day I see helmet-less hipster-cyclists rocketing down sidewalks, running red lights, weaving through traffic, travelling the wrong way down one-way streets and on and on. The latest thing in terms of hipster-cool bicycles are minimalist rides with no gears and no brakes:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3133/3248144604_fdc29f42c7_o.jpg [flickr.com]
While in these parts it's the law that cyclists must wear helmets and obey traffic rules, these laws are generally unenforced.