Hybrid HOV Waiver in Virginia

i thoguht the point of HOV lanes was to reduce cars for traffic reasons. An exemption for hybrids would likely cause the lanes to be less usefull and not encourage carpooling. This would make traffic and pollution worse. Seems like a silly idea to me.

The Virginia HOV exemption makes no sense. It isn't based on emissions, just whether the car is a hybrid or not. The non-California version of the HCH and Insight have worse emissions than a lot of regular cars. Giving them an exemption makes the clean fuel plates they are issued a joke.
I might not have a problem with giving an exemption to truly clean hybrids if the HOVs weren't already overcrowded. But since they are already overcrowded the exemption needs to go. Carpooling is better for congestion and the environment in the long run.

Driving a Hybrid on HOV lanes is an incentive that should not go away. Count how many HOV violators enter the lanes at Edsall Rd. heading south and compare that number to the number of Hybrids on the lanes at any time. There is madness during the evening hours at the entrance of Edsall Rd. We now have a bottle neck due to the number of violators between Edsall Rd. and Springfield. Also there are a lot of wannabees with these fake blue lights and private plates possing as gov officials. Are these privileged.

"The non-California version of the HCH and Insight have worse emissions than a lot of regular cars."

Oh really?? I think I'd like to see some hard proof on that point.

While I'm at it, might as well comment on the whole HOV thing, even though they really don't have many in the Cincinnati area. What is the purpose of the HOV lanes. Is it to reduce pollution? Or it is to reduce congestion?

I can think of instances where both purposes could be defeated. Of course, if Virginia is trying to reduce congestion, then mass transit systems should have exclusive access to these lanes, and they should be called mass transit lanes. On the other hand, if Virginia is trying to simply reduce pollution, then perhaps not only allowing hybrid vehicles, but ALL vehicles that meet lower emissions standards, such as the ULEV standard, should be allowed into these lanes, and they should be called LEV lanes, or something to that effect.

It is interesting to note that mass transit buses are some of the dirtiest vehicles on the road, and they are readily allowed onto the HOV lanes, as are diesel-powered Mack trucks who happen to have more that one person in the cab. Doesn't sound to me like Virginia is encouraging cleaner emissions...sounds to me like they're encouraging dirtier vehicles to carry more people.

Tim: If you want proof that the HCH and Insight emissions are worse than a lot of normal cars then look up their ratings. In 2004, the Civic and Insight versions sold outside CARB states were rated Tier2 bin9. Bin 9 gets dropped for model year 2007 since it is considered too dirty. There are a ton of regular cars out there that are much cleaner than bin 9. The Acura MDX is bin 5. The proof isn't hard to find for those willing to accept the facts. The Accord hybrid also has a poor rating. There are regular Accords that are cleaner. So, the hybrid ememption in VA for "clean fuel" cars is being given to cars that aren't even cleaner than plenty of other cars already on the road. Brilliance!
HOV lanes were designed to get cars off the road and reduce congestion. This exemption is an incentive to drive alone in a car that isn't necessarily helping air quality.

Hi Tom, you said:

"Even though I have a hybrid vehicle that would qualify for HOV lane use, I think it's stupid to allow hybrids in HOV lanes. Congestion doesn't get any better by me moving into the HOV lane from the regular lanes--it's still a car on the road. Congestion only improves by reducing the number of vehicles.

Virginia is the only state where you can go solo in the HOV lane with a hybrid, and yet the demand nationwide for hybrids is clearly there. So you don't need the HOV incentive--people are already on waiting lists just to get their hybrids."

Freeways are transport pipes. Like any transport pipe, you can increase the throughput by adding bandwidth, or increasing the operating speed. Letting more vehicles use the HOV lane means that you're more fully utilizing the available bandwidth, thus increasing throughput. A vehicle that's idling in gridlock, or rubber banding between 20 and 35mph puts out WAY more emissions than traffic that's able to hold steady speeds of 40+mph. Allowing hybrids to use the HOV lane will both improve traffic and reduce emissions.

For your second point, you should know that Arizona lets you use the HOV lane if you have a flexible fuel vehicle. Sounds good at first, but the way it works is that one of our state congressmen introduced a bill that gives you a $10,000 tax credit if you buy a vehicle that can use an alternative fuel such as propane or natural gas. Those vehicles are typically $2-3k more expensive than standard models.

Guess what happened? He bought three, and all his family members them too - and they happened to be full size trucks, suburbans, and other vehicles that get 14mpg and less. The kicker? They never run on any of those alternative fuels as well. Anyway, other people got wind of this and suddenly there were something like 30,000 orders for alternative fuel vehicles in Arizona which would cost the state $300 million in tax revenue. We the tax payers got shafted for something like $25 million before they could repeal the law.

The guy that introduced this bill was quickly kicked out of office, but the damage was still done. Every day I drive home from work and see giant SUV's getting 10-14mpg being driven by some guy yaking on his cel phone driving alone in the HOV lane. Changing the law to ban flex fuel vehicles and instead restrict it to vehicles that have a combined EPA mileage of at least 40mpg or something would make a lot more sense because the system is already broken and being exploited.

HOV lanes started during the oil crises of the 70's, a way to encourage people to reduce their use of fuel. So a hybrid driving on an HOV lane is sort-of using it for the intended purpose . OTOH, it is also taking up space that is a reward for people carpooling. And carpooling is far more economical than just buying a Prius or Civic to get to work faster.

"Alternative fuel vehicles" is a misnomer. A Prius is not an alternative fuel vehicle ,it runs on gas, which is a technology about 140 years old. Propane is an alternative fuel for a car, but they cannot use HOV lanes because propane powered cars normally also have a gas tank, and look identical to regular cars. Biodiesel powered cars cannot run on HOV lanes and get deductions, because again, they can run on regular diesel.

Personally, I think a Ford Escape running on an HOV lane, while a Golf TDI burning zero petroleum is not allowed, is ridiculous, but I can fully understand the rationale behind it. The TDI gets much better gas mileage, and as I said before, can run on a petroleum free fuel. I'm not knocking the Escape for what it does ,but it's not necessarily a "fuel efficient" vehicle, it depends on what you are using it for. In certain contexts, that new diesel Doddge Ram with the electric starter motor could be a very fuel-efficient solution, even though it only gets about 15 miles per gallon.

So, in short, I think hybrid cars, electric cars, diesel cars, etc. should not be allowed on HOV lanes without multiple passengers. Otherwise it erodes the reward for ordinary people choosing to use the HOV lane as intended- car pooling.

Tom: The highway bill also has an emissions rating that has to be met along with the 45 MPG. This could prevent a lot of the hybrids from getting this exemption because of the fuel sold in VA isn't as clean as in CA making emissions worse; and the version of some hybrids sold here aren't very clean no matter what type of gas is used.

"I would have never bought my hybrid if it wasn't for the HOV incentive. If they take it away, I will put it up for sale and buy a TDI VW or some other beater.

The good gas mileage and the atonement for my other gas sucking vehicles are just nice byproducts."

Fair enough, we all have our own reasons.

But there is no denying that there already is great demand for hybrids without the HOV exemption. Manufacturers are coming out with more hybrid models, increasing production of existing models, and there are waiting lists just to get them. All these buyers don't live in Virgina, so apparently lots of people don't need the HOV incentive to buy a hybrid.

But I have no problem with people who buy for the HOV use.

Tom: ULEV and AT-PZEV aren't as clean as ILEV. There currently are no gasoline powered cars that meet ILEV. Only CNGs and pure electrics. But I don't think ILEV is the standard in the legislation. I think the emissions level can be set by rule making by the Feds. The legislation refers to to many parts of the code and I don't want to spend the time reading it all.

I don't check this board every day, but Tom, you are wrong about increasing speeds not increasing throughput. If a vehicle is doing 25mph for 10 miles, it's on the road for 24 minutes. If it can do 60mph, it's on the road only 10 minutes. If you have 10,000 vehicles going that stretch of road per hour at 60mph, the road only contains an average of 1667 vehicles. Slow it down to 25mph and now because each vehicle is on the road 24 minutes instead of 10, to do 10,000 vehicles at 25mph means the road needs to hold 4000 vehicles.

Slower speeds = more gridlock.

I'm sorry that you don't understand that, but the good news is I just explained it to you, so now you know. Feel free to do independant research on your own as well so you can be a more informed person before you think that having traffic slow to 25mph doesn't hurt throughput.

Wow Photosmith, your panties sure are in a bunch today.

Photosmith said:
"I don't check this board every day, but Tom, you are wrong about increasing speeds not increasing throughput...

...Slower speeds = more gridlock...

...I'm sorry that you don't understand that, but the good news is I just explained it to you, so now you know. Feel free to do independant research on your own as well so you can be a more informed person before you think that having traffic slow to 25mph doesn't hurt throughput."

Photosmith, you didn't understand my post. I agree that congestion decreases as speed increases, and I never said anything to the contrary. However, my point was that we can't simply improve congestion solely by having everyone speed up. We get slower speeds and congestion because there are too many cars for a given stretch of road. Again, if we could all just speed up (which is what we would like to do anyway), we wouldn't have a problem. But alas, we can't speed up until we get to a section of road that has more physical capacity because it has more travel lanes or because there are fewer vehicles (e.g. after lots of cars exit at a popular offramp).

Next time, kindly re-read a post before you reply, so you understand it and so you realize that no one is attacking you.

Hey folks,

I really like the discussion and am interested in helping extend the HOV privileges for Hybrids. I think the benefits of cleaner air and better gas mileage (less dependence on oil) are equal to the goal of reducing congestion. I like the legislation that mandates hybrids with 45mpg or better get the exemptions because a lot of the new hybrids don't get better mileage than compact cars, such as the Honda Civic.
How can we pool together and get the VA legislature to extend the Hybrid HOV waiver?

Ok. I will make a confession. I bought a hybrid for the simple reason that I get to use the HOV. I know that people get very upset when people do this but my commute was getting to be over an hour and ahalf to two hours. If Virginia / DC / MD will not do anything about the traffic then I will do whatever I have to in order to save time.

I cannot count on any form of ride sharing due to the erractic nature of my work.

The one thing I notice is that it seems like there a fair amount of psuedo government vehicles that are non hyrbid, non HOV. I would say that there is at least 1 in 10 if not more. These are not police and most do not have governement plates. They have license plates from MD, VA and DC. So my question is why is the government allowing their employees to violate the HOV restrictions? These are not emergency vehicles rushing to a scene. These are government people going to work.

It seems like a precedence is being set. If you have the means or the power you will be able to use the HOV lanes.

I agree with leaving Hybrid's on HOV. The intent is to help the environment - to include reducing gas consumption and to preserve air quality. The large SUV's don't do either.
Traffic congestion will only get worse if you move the Hybrids out of HOV.
Until federal government mandates stronger requirements for automobile makers to address gas consumption nothing will change.
The oil companies will continue to see larger and larger profits and the roads will remain jammed.

Feedup in Va

They do routinely ticket the HOV violators! Once you get inside the beltway, if you are violating the requirements and you enter or exit 66, you have a slight chance of getting caught. There are so many violators that police can't ticket them all and a lot of them drive right on past the police as they are ticketing someone.

I stand corrected on the HOV history. I had heard it was implemented to save gas and reduce emmissions but according to VDOT's website, it was to reduce traffic. http://www.virginiadot.org/comtravel/hov-default.asp

As far as gas consumption being not so good in some hybrids, well I have to agree. But you have to compare apples to apples. For instance, a Ford escape to the hybrid escape and a regular civic to the hybrid civic. And in that comparison is made, there is a reasonable improvement. Comparing a VW car to a General Motor Truck is like comparing apples to watermelons.

I still think hybrids should continue to be allowed in the HOV but I believe there should be a limit on which ones are allowed. There should be a better standard to determine which hybrids should be allowed. Obvisiously, the prius, insight and HCH should be allowed because of their low consumption but the Honda Accord, Toyota Highlander, Lexus 400h and Ford Escape are not worthy (in my opinion). They just don't benefit the envirnoment as much.

I bet if the penality was more severe for violating the HOV requirements, like taking your vehicle away, I bet there would be a lot less cheaters. As it is now, the penalities are not harsh enough to deter people from breaking the law.

I'd love to see the Hybrid HOV waiver extended beyond July 2006! I didn't buy my hybrid because of the HOV lane but it's certainly a perk fighting for. And since I travel at 30+ mph in the HOV lane while others are parked I don't see hybrids causing a back up. There will ALWAYS be issues with the 495-66 merge. I see many "cheaters" in the HOV lane, (not hybrid, less & than 2 people) on 66. I also see a lot of them caught in the morning at the exits. he!he!he!

What about kids? How is traveling in the HOV lane with a 6-year old cutting down on traffic? I think to qualify for HOV it should be two (or more) people of driving age or hybrid. Sure there'd be a gray area near 16-years old, but a kid in a car seat doesn't cut it! I didn't see anyone mention this on an earlier message, but I may have missed it.

At least those of us in hybrids are helping the environment, which may not be the MAIN reason for HOV but it is one of the reasons. A 12-year old in the car as passenger #2 doesn’t help cut traffic or emissions.

Wagonman you really should do your research before you start talking. HOV is based on emissions and not the fact that it is Hybrid vehicle. The 2005 Honda Accord Hybrid is a perfect example it is ULEV and does not qualify for HOV exemption.

Hey Wagonman,
You are right that people need to do some research, however you also have to remember rule 3a of the internet: truth is only as truthful as the person who posted it. Do you tell someone to do the research and than direct to a Blog?

Now I won't disagree with you on the Tiers, just note as you sort of noted that there have been changes and every year there are new teirs and bins so comparing from one year to the next is sometimes difficult.

The following site is actually a good site for this discussion as the epa is the org that creates and performs the tests and standards in question.

http://www.epa.gov/autoemissions/all-rank-06.htm

Notice, MOST hybrids are cleaner than or at least as clean as their regular counterparts on the air pollution score. The first group are those CA Emission cars you were talking about. Note that since they cost more to make not as many are available and therefore its hard to find one except where regulations require them.

I don't know why the Insight is way down the list with an 8 out of 10. Huhh.

Now for the other side of the chart. Hybrids definitely have an advantage when it comes to the Greenhouse gas Score. Some 10 out of 10s.

Personally I have a HCH that is a Tier-2 Bin-2 CARB cert. AT-PZEV with a smog index score of .09. (Avg for new cars is .58) It has a score of 9 on the APS which makes it cleaner than some of those higher tier CA cars and a Greenhouse score of 10.

What does this all mean? 99 times out of 100 the hybrid is a better environmental choice.

Oh, and they'll have to shoot my tires to get me out of the HOV lane.

I'm an idiot, I reversed the ratings on my last post. I though "10" was dirty like the Tiers. The four top cars are the ones in VA, and the bottom 4 are the CA emissions cars. This explains thy the CARB gas rating didn't look right to me. But everthing else I've stated still applies. You can tell which ones are the CARB gas tests by the map of the US showing CARB states as blue.

i think that the Hybrid is one of the dumest cars that i have ever seen

Wrong spelling or not...Milkey K said it the best..
dumb...so he did I typo...no better argument than
that...why go let taxpayers pay for a doomed
project...picture this a regular honda civic getting
38mpg cannot use the HOV lane, but a hybrid
SUV getting 24mpg can!!!!!!!!!!

Looking forward to the day most cars are hybrids..
...while they clog up the HOV lane with 1 driver each
I can cruise 3 lanes by myself in my Jetta TDI...lol

Maybe HOV lanes should be abolished! They have never lived up to their intended purpose - originally intended to reduce fuel consumption and when that didn't work, to reduce congestion. I believe that the only reason they still exist is because of the commercial bus and van pool lobby in Richmond. Everyone (except the commercial interests) would be better served if the HOV lanes were either converted to express lanes or integrated into the normal traffic lanes. Why should my tax dollars subsidize a few individuals who want to be confined in a germ laden bus.

VDOT assumes that most commuters in the outlying suburbs only commute to DC (north and south). This may have been true 25 or 30 years ago. I would suggest that a growing majority of commuters aren't in a situation that allows them to take advantage of HOV. I believe that most people who carpool do so because they live a distance from work and want to save on the expense of buying gasoline - NOT out of some benevolent desire to releive congestion or save the environment. That is - most people who carpool would do so regardless of the existence of HOV lanes.

As someone here suggested, adding traffic lanes (increasing the bandwidth) would do far more to releive congestion than continuing the failed farce of HOV lanes. The politicians understand this too. If you've ever driven through or around Richmond you will see that they do - plenty of "bandwidth" to be found there. If there was (is) money enough to build HOV lanes and all the requisite infratructure necessary to support them, wouldn't that money have been better spent and served us better by building the necessary lanes to carry the flow of traffic?

I have a hybrid and I will be sad in July. However, I think VA should just open up the HOV lanes, add two lanes to each side of 95 and I think this would help. When all 4 lanes are open they usually flow well, except for Fridays. Adding two lanes to each side would alleviate some congestion. JMHO.

My problem isn't so much with the waiver for hybrid cars, but the fact that non-HOV and non-exempt vehicles are allowed to enter the HOV lanes between Duke and Edsall Roads - as long as they get off at Franconia Road or back onto the main lanes just south of that. Why is this allowed? I believe it was to allieviate additional congestion around the mixing bowl, but all it seems to do is bring the HOV lanes to an absolute crawl from Landmark down to Lorton. Close up that entrance and keep the HOV lanes moving!

My TDi is more efficient (and cleaner) than your Hybrid!

and I use biodiesel so it is considered an alternative fuel vehicle.

TDI vs. gasoline - The TDi emissions levels are among the lowest ever for Diesel powered engines. All TDi powered Volkswagens sold in the US meet so-called "Tier 1" emission limits. The TDi is often "cleaner" overall than gasoline powered cars. CO2 emissions are 25% less than a conventional gasoline powered engine. CO, HC and NOx emissions are less than previous Volkswagen Diesels. Diesel fuel has lower evaporative emissions than gasoline. Diesel fuel also requires less energy intensive refining than gasoline.

Diesel engines generally emit higher amounts of NOx and particles than equivalent gasoline powered cars, even though CO and HC emissions may be lower, and total emissions are lower due to much better fuel consumption. The current TDI Volkswagens typically emit slightly somewhat lower than the Tier 1 limits for NOx and particles (around 0.052 g/mi of particulate matter [PM] and 0.82 g/mi of NOx per EPA data), but the CO and HC emissions are far below the Tier 1 limits and well below the emissions of the equivalent gasoline engine.

Furthermore, most of the unregulated toxic gaseous emissions tend to be lower for diesel engines. For example, benzene (which is a known carcinogen) is lower in diesels by nearly an order of magnitude (i.e., factor of ten) than an equivalent gasoline engine. Diesels also tend to be significantly lower in emissions of alkenes (e.g., ethene), carbonyls (e.g., formaldehyde), and semi-volatiles like polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs, many of which are known or suspected carcinogens).

PM has always been regulated by mass (e.g., grams per mile). However, very recent studies show that particle number may be the more important aspect of PM emissions. According to a "real world vehicle testing report" by University of Minnesota renowned combustion particle scientists, new data show that PM number emissions from modern gasoline cars may equal or exceed diesel PM levels. It goes on to discuss gasoline PM emissions and that fact that gasoline engines may need a particulate filter much like that of a diesel. The University of Minnesota study showed that newer and older gasoline vehicles matched or exceeded diesel PM number emissions at high speed/load . It appears that diesel engines equipped with diesel particulate filters (DPFs), as many are now in Europe, will have a significant advantage in PM emissions over gasoline engines. Other recent studies are suggesting that gasoline PM is generally more toxic that diesel PM.

The emission levels from diesel engines tend to remain more-or-less constant throughout the useful life of the engine, whereas gasoline engines have many more emission-related components which deteriorate and lead to higher and higher emissions as the engine gets older.

Volkswagen has made continuous progress on emissions through the years, and 2000-model TDI engines emit far less than the 1996 models first available here. Further progress has been made in Europe with new fuel-injection and emission-control technology, but for various technical and market-related reasons, this technology is not available here yet, but will likely be arriving within the next few years.

Me to.
my TDI gets 47 miles pergallon in the city and over 55 mpg on the highway between fuling stations.

Any one can go and purchase a hybrid. It is your choice and now the people who abided by the law are the ones being punished. I will not vote for any lawmaker who voted against this.
Joyce
Northern Virginia

On this whole HOV thing, if the environment really is an argument, the logic is really not very clear. You could easily argue from the other end, since the amount of time the most polluting cars are running should be reduced they should be allowed on HOV. Since hybrids, on the other hand are really most efficient in stop&go traffic, and pollute least in that environment, they could afford to stand in traffic for hours.

HOV exemptions make absolutely no sense, unless of course you are a lobbyist and are paid from Hybrid manufacturers.

You make some good points. But switching all the HOV lanes to bicycles would accomplish more...

Also, the idea of letting Hybrids use the HOV lanes is that it encourages hybrid ownership. You can't just look at the emissions of two competing vehicles while they are on the commuter road!

"One being that 20% of all diesel fuel would be grown in the good ol’ UsofA by American farmers and not imported from terrorists."

US farmers use huge amounts of petroleum products (such as fertilizer) to produce their products. They also use their smoggy cancer-causing tractors and trucks to produce, harvest, and ship their organic, bio-, earth-friendly stuff to the folks who clog the roads around around here with their Euro-diesels.

Hey Jim,

Oil is NOT used in the production of fertilizer. The macronutrients required by plants are N (Nitrogen), K (Potassium) and P (Phosphorus). Oil is hydrocarbon, made from H (Hydrogen) and C (Carbon). There are no plant nutrients in oil.

Nitrogen fertilizer (N) is made from ammonia, which in turn is manufactured from natural gas, not oil. Natural gas is not peaking, but when it does, fertilizer can be produced from coal, as is done in China today:

Fertilizers that are commonly used in agriculture contain the three basic plant nutrients: nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. Some fertilizers also contain certain "micronutrients," such as zinc and other metals, that are necessary for plant growth. Materials that are applied to the land primarily to enhance soil characteristics (rather than as plant food) are commonly referred to as soil amendments.

Everyone knows that crude oil is long and short chain hydrogens and conatins very little nitrogen.

dont propagate myths saying that fertilizer is made from oil, we dont need anyone else making the people of the united stated any dumber.

Jim: I admire you for cycling to work every day. Indeed if we all did that we would dramatically reduce pollution and much of the congestion, and we would all be healthier for it. I only cycle to work about twice a week, the rest of the time I drive what you call a stinky diesel (2000 Jetta TDI). The truth however is that many of us will never be able to bike to work, simply because our bodies are not all made the same way, or the distances are too great, or because we do not all have the needed facilities at work (I would arguably smell worse than my stinky diesel if I had no shower after biking in). A level playing field, really is all we can really strive for. The Diesel engine, especially now that we also have means to control particulate emmission with filters (widely available in Europe (even for heavy equipment as after market installations), and that noxious oxides emissions are in process of being solved with nitrogen injection, diesel engines are really just as clean as any gasoline engine, in fact cleaner if you consider CO emissions. And we are not even talking of biodiesel yet. This is why any kind of waiver for any kind of vehicle on HOV, is in many ways unfair, and in its current form not really conducive to improvements for the environment, and, form an economic point of view, inefficient. More efficient and sustainable transport at the end of the day is really what we are all looking for. You are defenitely doing your part, but you cannot really expect everybody to do the same!!