I can't find the reference, but I believe it was mentioned in the Solar Roof reveal event or soon after.
Electrifying Amsterdam Schiphol Airport — Tesla Taxis, Electric Buses, Etc. (#CleanTechnica Original) | CleanTechnica
Also Teo Taxi in Montréal has a fleet of ~150 electric vehicles, mostly a mix of Tesla MS/MX and Kia Soul. (Not sure of the proportions of each brand, but its near half and half I would say.) They operate at the same rate as regular taxis, although through an application that shows you how far the taxi is from you, and billing is carried out through the app. And they have their own private superchargers, although they need to go to the public ones when it guest below -20C and you loose range like hell because of heating. So yes, it does exist. Picture source
There you go, I also discovered China is running electric busses the other day One city in China has more electric buses than all of America’s biggest cities have buses Charging must become a logistical nightmare when it gets cold.
Something occurred to me the other day... Are electric vehicles paying road taxes? In the States around 30 to 70 cents a gallon of petroleum fuel are taxes, how are electric vehicles contributing infrastructure costs?
They hit you in the registration process. My license plates cost - well, there is a line claiming something like "road tax" cost. This is obscured a bit by the incentives to go EV. At least- they did not forget to notice that EV will be traveling on the roads for free. There is a mechanism to charge us free-loaders.
But road tax on petroleum vehicles is ongoing, there has to be some sort of ongoing mileage tracking and charge rate eventually, especially if these vehicles are traveling interstate.
Petroleum tax - cents/gal going into the highway trust fund - that has been pilfered and depleted and swept into alternate projects. Well, that tax has been so corrupted that perhaps a new way to pay for roads is due.
My side... Eventually EVs will have to contribute to infrastructure costs, petroleum can't subsidize electricity forever in that way. I believe it needs to be considered as it may come as sticker shock when they do eventually decide EVs need to contribute.
Well, in Canada, electric vehicles reduce government health care costs by reducing costs for asthma, cancer, and other disease treatments. It also prolongs the productive tax-paying life of residents. That leaves more tax money to spend on roads. The Cost of Air Pollution - Health Impacts of Road Transport - en - OECD
The dust and many chemicals kicked up by transportation is not going to be eliminated and what about the increased electromagnetic bath we will be living in? Nobody knows the health effects of that yet. Besides, I doubt government is going to transfer healthcare savings to transportation infrastructure, that's just not the way they operate...
Yep - cents per gallon Trust Fund was a "smart" road funding mechanism for many years. Time for new thinking. EV contributing to Health Care savings as a road tax shows how complex Tax thinking has/needs to become. Now I'm being very generous to think our "leaders" will be able to find their way through special interests to make a road building program that is fair. Hard to even define fair.
While I'm no fan of having to shell out more $$$ myself, I do think it's reasonable and expected that we should pay our share of infrastructure costs. What's more, I think by doing so it eliminates yet another item that can contribute to an anti-EV sentiment. We are already a bunch of entitled whiners that get free electricity and reserved parking spaces after all... and get special use of the HOV lanes. Now we aren't paying for road use either??
You mean like the broadband EF noise kicked off by spark plugs? You do realize that the first type of radio transmitter to be invented was the spark gap transmitter, don't you? There's more total power going to an EV motor than a spark plug, but it's narrower band, lower frequency. Ever compared the size of a low frequency antenna to a high frequency one? You have to have a *much* larger receiver to have any detectable effect from low frequency RF than high frequency. High frequency RF is much easier to capture into objects. Meanwhile, narrowband radiation is much easier to shield than broadband. This is all ignoring the fact that any evidence tying EM radiation to health effects is sketchy at best.
The gas tax isn't a good representative of road use anyway. better fuel mileage cars pay significantly less. Funding infrastructure is an across the board problem.
It sort of works. It filters out the people who drop into a thread with stuff you don’t want to hear. However it does not protect against disrupters who take over and strangle a thread. I would have liked to see this conversation continue constructively. But when all the constructive people check out because someone strangled it, the thread dies, and the forum becomes less interesting.