Paris votes to crack down on SUVs | Non-Parisians will be charged almost $20 per hour to park large gas or hybrid vehicles within the city center in a bid to address pedestrian safety and air pollu…::Parisians have voted to increase parking charges for out-of-town SUV drivers as part of the city’s efforts to address road safety, air pollution, and climate change.

  • rsuri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) study that found SUVs to be 20 percent more polluting and twice as likely to kill a pedestrian in a collision compared to smaller conventional cars.

    Twice as likely to kill a pedestrian…if that number holds up this needs to happen in more cities. Driving an excessively deadly vehicle through crowded areas shouldn’t be free.

    • Kyrgizion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I fucking hate SUV’s, and I drive one (company car, had no say in the matter). Tax them all to hell and back.

    • pathief@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s not free, at least not in Portugal. You pay an yearly tax per vehicle, the value depends on the vehicle model.

    • jettrscga@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I don’t think some millionaire earned a 2x chance to kill a pedestrian by being able to pay. I’m not a fan of fees that only apply rules to poor people.

      But outright bans are harder to get passed, so fees are better than nothing.

      • CaptainProton@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Funny thing about markets though, when you put fees on SUVs that just means the prices on used SUVs will go down, and so you’ll have fees being leveed on only the poorest who have no choice but to buy the cheapest car they can find and the richest who don’t care about the fee.

        • Something Burger 🍔@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          They can still buy used regular cars. Anyway, in Paris and its suburbs, poor people can’t afford a car in the first place.

          • CaptainProton@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            That’s a very ivory-Tower retort - ‘they can still buy regular cars’.

            If you can barely put food on the table and NEED a car (eg for work), and nearly nothing in your bank account, do you spend $3000 on a sedan or $1000 on an equally good SUV?

            Second hand market prices in general are extremely demand driven, and with vehicles in particular there are so many other costs to vehicle ownership that a change in price won’t shift overall demand much. This just changes the balance pushing SUVs to the bottom of the market. Nobody buying a Porsche SUV in Paris cares about your silly tax.

              • CaptainProton@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                Tradespeople, they generally own their own tools and bring several boxes to even a basic job, plenty of jobs where you don’t need a dedicated truck.

                My time in Paris was before we had kids, so I don’t know about the logistics there, but in NYC where I did not even think about owning a car for years it’s Very difficult without a car, and there are no more than a few neighborhoods with everything is actually available locally.

                Also anyone just starting their business who doesn’t have a purpose built vehicle yet - breaking into catering, flower shop, etc.

    • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      It’s time for Pedestrian crash avoidance mitigation (PCAM) to be enforced as standard feature. Much better solution. Large vehicles will still need to exist, even though I agree fewer of them should.

    • viking@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’d love to see how they calculated those 20%. If it’s merely a statistic of which type of car was involved in what share of deadly accidents with pedestrians, it says nothing about the car but rather about the drivers.

      Once a car reaches a certain speed, it really doesn’t matter if it’s an ultralight vehicle or a tank.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Less mass means less momentum, so less force is required to slow it down, which means it can slow down faster in the time between noticing the pedestrian and colliding.

        Higher hood means less visibility directly in front of the vehicle. It also means it’s more likely to hit the centre of mass so the body takes the full force and falls on the ground the vehicle is moving towards, rather than lower so that the legs get pushed out and the body ends up falling on the hood.

        On the flip side, they are more visible and generally louder, so pedestrians might be making fewer mistakes on their end.

        The differences aren’t about when they hit someone at a high enough speed any vehicle will likely kill them, it’s about the thresholds between a harmless bump and a fatal injury.

        And even if the driver is the main factor, that’s all the more reason to increase the burden involved in driving them.

  • idealotus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    I think restrictions like these should also include SUV EVs. Safety is the bigger priority than incentivizing a few more EV sales and in the future, there may only be EVs anyway.

    • spookex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Honestly, they should just ban all SUVs from entering altogether.

      Not because of the environment or safety, just because I hate that everything is an SUV these days and they are boring af

      • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Honestly, they should just ban all SUVs from entering altogether.

        That’s not going to convince me to sell my SUV. It’d just cause me to buy a second car.

      • WhiteHawk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        That would mean lots of people would have to buy a new car, which is much worse for the environment than to keep driving an SUV

        • Katana314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Or people could just take the train or walk.

          Remember, we’re talking about Paris, not a third world country in North America.

            • Katana314@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              You said “have to”. They don’t have to. You’re now talking about whether they “want to” - which is now a question of whether they want to keep money in their wallet.

              • WhiteHawk@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                Don’t be pedantic. I meant that they have to buy a new car if they want to keep driving, which most of them probably will, since they wouldn’t be driving in the first place if there was a better alternative

                • Katana314@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  I said “want to”, and I meant “want to”. I don’t consider it pedantry - Everyone has a choice.

                  • People looking to buy their first car (or replace a junker) can either get an SUV, or a sedan. This legislation tips their decision.
                  • People who own a car (because they live in an area that needs it) that happens to be an SUV, and are then planning to go into Paris, can choose to instead drive to a local train station, and make the rest of their trip using local means.
                  • People who live inside of Paris can choose not to buy a car at all; or just stop using the SUV they bought earlier after deciding it was a bad fit for their area.

                  There’s perhaps a fringe case of people that can afford two cars, own one SUV, and still insist on driving into the city - whether that means stomaching the fee, or buying a second car. That is very much a “want”, one that increasingly dense cities cannot easily cater to. I’d even say there’s not a huge demographic of people who could decide to buy a second car purely for this situation.

  • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    So a Toyota rav4 hybrid (3,800 pounds) would be treated like a big truck. RAV4 has better front viewing than a sedan. This is just feel good bullshit.

    If it’s about safety just make Pedestrian crash avoidance mitigation (PCAM) standard by law going forward.

    • rmuk@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I’d like to fine you at least €20/hour for typing with your fucking toes.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Two pedestrians walk out into the street while looking at their phones. They bump into each other, and each says “Oof. Oh, sorry. I wasn’t looking where I was going.” Then they both continue on their way, and barely remember that each failed to follow the rules of travel on the roads of their town.

      That interaction becomes VASTLY different when one or both of those people is driving an SUV.

        • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Yeah, you’re guilty. A HEAVIER vehicle pollutes the city more, a LARGE vehicle creates a bigger hazard for smaller vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians than someone in a smaller car, and a WIDE vehicle creates a hazard when you park in an already narrow road.

          Like, I get that you’re trolling, but if you seriously don’t understand why large vehicles harm the inhabitants of cities, especially old, dense cities, then I can’t help you.

  • vinylshrapnel@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    So if I rent a 9 pax van and bring 8 friends to Paris, it will cost more money than if we all took separate smaller vehicles?