I'd agree with 'does not help with', but how does it increase congestion? Given that the prices of the cars, even with FRT exemption, are still significant. I really don't think there are a huge number of owners buying EVs who would NEVER have purchased a petrol car. I'm not saying NONE, but given the prices of the cars, it is likely that those few would be taking equally congesting forms of transportation anyway.
You may be right, although I'm quite sure that at least a few people will be attracted by the idea of having a "green" car, rather than just a car. Moreover, it's clear that there is an appetite for cars in HK. But let's stick with "does not help with".
Congestion, and measures to affect it, are really complicated. I spent the first couple of years of my professional life working for Transport Road Research Laboratory in UK, and supported teams of people working there on the problem. Interestingly, in those days Hong Kong was used as a test bed for many experimental technologies such as Electric Road Pricing.
That's interesting to know. It's incredibly disappointing that we have stood still on ERP while other places have adopted it to great effect for many years.
For example, driving your private car to dinner and back vs taking a taxi has no impact on congestion - in fact, arguably it reduces congestion as the private car is in active use for 100% of the time it is congesting the roads, while taxis have time they are just spinning their wheels looking for a fare to pickup. Worse, if you pre-book the taxi, they are congesting while coming to pick you up. Even having more cars has no direct impact on congestion - say someone has 10 cars in their garage but can only drive 1 on the roads at a time, as an extreme example.
What impacts congestion is either reducing the number of vehicle miles travelled on the roads (e.g. avoiding the journey altogether), making more use of the road space (ride sharing, buses, trains, etc), or spreading the load (peak vs off-peak). There are also measures related to the road systems themselves that can have an impact (smarter traffic lights, and better traffic control in general - all related to smoothing out the road network so the traffic is better spread across the entire network).
As to the first paragraph, is that absolutely correct? As a layman, I look at it this way - the taxi is on the road anyway and its job is to get people in and out of a district. If I take the taxi into the district then it is unlikely it will hang around there, and in fact someone else can get into the cab and be driven out of the district, making sure that people move. If I had gotten into my car and driven it then parked it in the carpark in the district then no-one can leave the district at the same time. Not to mention all the space that is taken up by car parks to store cars for say 2-8 hours/day. Perhaps I am confusing congestion with transport efficiency?
More importantly, I view congestion from the point of view not only of cars v other motorised vehicles, but cars v other forms of transport (motorised and non-motorised), in particular bicycles. However, that and other issue are covered in your second paragraph.
A further problem which arises in HK and which is (I think) largely peculiar to congestion in HK is the usage of private drivers. This causes at least the following problems. Firstly, many people want their driver to wait no more than 10-15 minutes away from where they are, particularly at times when they want to be picked up (usually rush hour). This causes congestion NOT in a/the carpark, but in other areas where there should be no congestion. Secondly, some people go even further and think that their car should be able to wait for them for, say, 15 minutes on Queen's Road Central at 6:30pm on a Friday night, rather than, like mere mortals, themselves going to the are a bit earlier to wait for the car.
This gets worse when one considers that the mentality held by some (most?) people with private drivers, which is "I have and have paid for a car and driver, so I might as well use it (to maximum effect)." So even if people are considerate, they may forego taking public transport - the aforementioned taxis - simply because they would rather prefer to wait another 5-10 minutes for their car.
Of course, there has to be a balance, as otherwise everyone would take taxis and there would be none available, but on busy roads and at busy times it is clear that such has been upset in the wrong direction. The best example of this is, again, Queen's Road Central in the evenings when two to three cars waiting in 1 lane clogs up the middle lane, and sometimes even the right-hand lane, bringing traffic to a halt. It is at those times and on such roads that something like a coherent policy involving ERP and/or proper traffic/parking enforcement is useful, since it tells people that they have to contribute more to the public purse for the convenience and for inconveniencing others through congestion and (for fossil fuel vehicles) air quality.
I agree that at least the roadside air quality would be better if all of these cars were EVs, but it would NOT solve the problems of congestion caused by there being too many private motor vehicles on the road at a particular time and place.
What we are talking about with the FRT exemption and promotion of EVs in general, is simply displacing a petrol car for an equivalent EV. That is the goal, anyway.
Yes, I think that is laudable.
If I was a man on the street, I would rather the gov't charge tax on EV though at a lesser level than an ICE. Then use this tax for cleaning up the air. I am sure that money can be more efficient at managing air pollution than having a Tesla replace a BWM/Benz. A lot of our air pollution suprisingly comes from the frieght ships that are coming in and out of HK's ports. We should not kid ourselves that by consuming a Tesla car, we are in any way green and clean. We are just doing better to the guy in a BMW/Benz or perhaps less since we didn't donate to the HK govt treasury.
I agree, but the proposition only works IF the Government uses the money to clean up the air. We have a massive warchest which is the result of John Tsang forecasting a deficit every year which then magically turns into a huge surplus. Yet we also have well-known air quality problems which our Government seems to be incapable of remedying. It might be that some of them would be more sympathetic if they took public transport rather than chauffered Phateons.
However, I do think that using a Tesla or an EV is, all things being equal, better for roadside pollution than someone else in an equivalent vehicle powered by an ICE..
