Taxing the Weight of EV Batteries Would Be a Real Green Solution

Isn&#x27;t (battery) weight a proxy for what we really care about, energy consumption per covered distance? Seems like if you&#x27;d tax the latter, manufacturers would have more options to innovate around efficiency rather than just battery weight and provide lower-taxed vehicles. Battery weight will of course still be important to get consumption down, but perhaps there are other ways as well to make cars more efficient.<p>One example: a thing often overlooked is the efficiency of the onboard charger, which can incur a loss of up to 32% on for example the Renault Zoe [1].<p>1: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lachaineev.fr&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lachaineev.fr&#x2F;</a> ( french )

Probably the only useful thing in the article is highlighting that some EVs are so heavy that their stopping distance from 70mph can be a much larger distance than people would expect at over 200ft. It might be safer for the driver of that heavy vehicle but a 9000 lb truck rear ending you is going to be pretty rough.

Seems rather short-sighted and unlikely to accomplish the authors goals. If we incentivize weight it seems we might end up with less safe batteries just because safer ones weigh just a little bit more. We could also lose efficiency and durability because running fewer batteries harder, or scrapping thermal management components, could reduce weight.

Having read the above, I definitely agree that the Hummer EV is an exercise in American excess, just like the H1-H3 before it. I&#x27;m personally in the favor of miles traveled method, with modifiers for curb weight and anything else that impacts the intended uses of said tax. Specifically, I&#x27;d like to see an odometer based system charged at tag renewal (or in arrears, to make it more predictable).<p>Then reduce&amp;repurpose the current gas tax for uses to mitigate externalities caused in post-sale use.<p>I&#x27;m also in favor of a similar externalities penalty for electrical generation (even though the current state of combustion generation is much cleaner than a typical ICE), so that economic forces are able to operate taking that into account.

I keep seeing the _right_ claim the _left_ is coming for my truck with increased taxes based on weight. My 2018 GMC 1500 Crew Cab 6.5ft bed Light Truck weighs ~5,300 lbs.<p>I looked at the weight of some of these EVs and yikes 2,900 lbs for just the battery pack? 1.5 TONS? WeW.<p>I&#x27;m all for higher taxation on heavy and commercial vehicles to help with road maintenance and up keep. That being said I only drive my truck when needed &lt;1k miles &#x2F; year. I wouldn&#x27;t even have the truck but where I live, the lack of access to rentals and friends with trucks. It&#x27;s a need even though not needed often.

This is exactly 180 degrees wrong.<p>It suggests that taxing the vehicle weight would lead to less safety.<p>In fact, previous CARB pollution controls have paid for themselves, just in the reduction in death as a result of lightweighting changes made to achieve the mpg goals.<p>Tax the vehicle weight. It&#x27;s an externality.<p>If you care about some aspect of mining, tax or regulate that directly.

Why not simply tax vehicles relative to the wear that they induce on the road, i.e. total weight^4?<p>It&#x27;ll be hard to implement a &quot;gas tax&quot; for electricity with so many people charging at home. Why not simply tax people relative to the maintenance costs which they incur?

If no one ever electrified a car, I feel the world would be better off so people wouldn&#x27;t be mislead thinking electric cars are a green solution to transit. Trains, busses, and bikes are the green solution.

But, why? We WANT people to buy electric cars... It&#x27;s like the patient isn&#x27;t breathing, bleeding to death and the nephrologist wants us to test their kidney function.