.. to meet EU air pollution targets.
Would it work in HK? Dollars collected from registration taxes go to road maintenance and free public transport?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-cut-pollution
.. to meet EU air pollution targets.
Would it work in HK? Dollars collected from registration taxes go to road maintenance and free public transport?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-cut-pollution
I doubt it would make much of a dent. Owning a car is more about status than convenience in HK and public transport is already very cheap. It's quicker and cheaper to take cabs than to use a car when you factor in parking. Many that need to drive do so because they live in outlying areas that are not well served by public transport so that wouldn't change either.
This idea is great in countries where car ownership is more common.
It will work in Germany... And good on them for using a logical, common sense approach.
Just like German society has embraced passive energy home ownership and setting realistic renewable energy ( 2050) targets, as they make demonstrated efforts to reduce energy imports ( fossil fuel) and wean themselves off Nuclear power.
France might even adopt the same idea, as they're pretty motivated to greatly reduce their middle East oil dependence, and have similar renewable energy goals set. To achieve that we need to use private cars less ie use less energy to go about our daily lives.
Which suggests that we should lower our present consumption based growth is good economic ideology when resources arent unlimited...
Last edited by Skyhook; 15-02-2018 at 09:31 AM.
All public transport along with taxis, initially at least within city limits, should be electric too.
Before long there will be autonomous vehicles providing taxi service with smart fare sharing either direct to destination or as feeder services.
Wealthy developed countries (incl. HK SAR of PRC?) could afford to make it free, perhaps with an intial quota-as-needed-free basis with others octopussying it while developing countries would start with Pay-as-you-go.
But let's scratch HK off the list. The CCP would never order their HK minions to do it to their loyal taxi franchise and Bus Co. owners' guilds.
Would free public transport work in Hong Kong, one of the most densely populated urban centres in the world? Obviously, but it would entail some level of wealth transfer or progressive taxation and that concept makes it unlikely to pass through the new, improved and carefully manufactured "Legislative Council" here.
I actually disagree with this idea, or think it will have some issues. Driving a car into a city is more expensive than public transportation, so why will making it free for those who are already dishing out money for travel? I understand it's an incentive, but still, I think the money gathered from the tickets would be better used investing in greener forms of transportation and improving the infrastructure. Students in Germany already travel for free on local transportation systems and there are very good bicycle networks.
So, what is it now? Do you want the CPC to interfere or not? Make up your mind.
Did you see this?
https://freepublictransport.info/city/chengdu/
Why does Germany want to wean itself off nuclear power? It's the energy source that has the best environmental outcome while providing the most power and being the safest. Renewables are not going to get us there now, and the push for electric vehicles has hardly begun. Germany is still burning far too much coal, if they reduce their nuclear power supply they will have to burn more.
EU politicians need to stop listening to the populist and antiscience activists and start making decisions based on actual facts. Free public transport is only good if the power supply for the transport system is also not damaging to the environment.
btw hk public transport is heavily subsidized. at least the railway is. HK government foot quite a large chunk of the infrastructure construction and the fares collected are just to cover the maintenance capex. if the cost of construction is passed on to passengers, the cost would likely be 2~3times current i think.
It could be unfounded public opinions, but I think one of the main points people against it make is that the nuclear power is too close to residential areas and if an accident happened it would have devastating causes. The waste also is transported and people aren't happy with that passing through their neighborhoods either and the risk it poses.
Edit to my previous post: I forgot to say, I think this initiative is just a financial reward to drivers instead of putting money in better deserved areas or rewarding people who are already doing the better thing. For those that do live in rural areas and need to drive to commute, more investment could be made in park-and-ride areas... *sigh* But living in Hong Kong, I'm scratching my head and wondering why all the fuss about air pollution in Europe?