There is another company coming online now making an all American made three wheeled vehicle that gets 70 mpg using natural gas. It will carry three people and is fully enclosed unlike the Tuc-Tuc. And it performs like a sports car. They include a compressor with the vehicle and it is supposed to get 700 miles on a 10 gallon tank. So starting the week off with a full tank for less than $15 or so is quite a deal not to mention ZERO Pollution and decreasing our dependcy on oil!!!!

How do these things look from a safety point of view? What about their place in the regulatory framework? I could imagine riding one of those things to work in the city, but that's only because I live in a dense, inner-city neighborhood where the streets are not too big and the traffic not too fast. I would have a hard time imagining myself riding one of those things down the interstate, and I imagine that most regulators would as well.

Furthermore, these things are currently used like taxicabs -- riders pay professionals to get driven around in them. Would they be used in that manner in the West, or would we use them as personal vehicles instead? If so, how could we get properly sized parking spaces set aside for them, and widespread driver training for them?

Three wheeled vehicles tend to be less stable than four wheelers, so safety and training is an issue.

In truth, the main advantage to using these things over a Prius taxicab is their ability to dart in and out of traffic, getting ahead of the gridlock, based on their smaller size. If we find that such traffic behavior is unreasonable or impractical, then their main advantage becomes moot. They also take up less space, but until architects, road designers and parking garage developers plan around this class of vehicle, users will have a hard time fully taking advantage of this fact.

Brent,
70 miles per gallon on CNG? How do gallons figure in measuring the quantity of CNG? At what pressure and temperature? Surely measuring by mass would be more effective.
Also, CNG powered vehicles are not zero emissions. They produce at least C02. If the engine is internal combustion then probably NO, CO, and other combustion products.
This might sound like a nitpick but such errors detract from the credibility of your report. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for CNG vehicles: at least until we have to start importing it.

I can't speak for laws in the UK but in the US 3-wheeled vehicles are required to meet the same standards as 2-wheeled vehicles for safety and emissions not the requirements of cars.

Motorized rickshaws

That's kind of an oxymoron, since the term "rickshaw" comes from the Japanese "jinrikisha" which literally means "human strength/power vehicle".

What is the USA import tariff on Oil, gasoline, coal, natural gas and electricity?

Is it equivalent to the $0.54/gal on ethanol?

One would think that import tariffs on high GHG fossil fuels should be equivalent if not much higher.

What are the justifications (other than old fashion protectionism) to impose such a high import tariff (54/179 = 30%) on a relatively clean liquid fuel?

An equivalent tariff would be more than justified, could add about $30 on each imported Oil barrel and bring gasoline retail price to $4+/gal.

Equivalent energy tariff application would promote sales of Hybrids and PHEVs, reduce GHG, increase government revenues, reduce current high USA budget and trade deficits and oil import.

USA's international credibility gap would stop expanding and oil wars could be stopped.

Rafael seems to have it all worked out. The Germans aren't as selfish as the Americans, proof being the $ 6.40 a gallon paid in Germany as against the $ 3.00 paid in the States. By that logic, Venezuela must be uber selfish, with a price of 20 cents a gallon ( if this figure is wrong, would someone offer the right price ), and ditto for Saudi Arabia.
Rafael doesn't mention the fact that Germany is a smaller country with way more people per sq.mile, lending itself to the economic and practical use of much more mass transit, inter and intra city. The opposite end of the spectrum is Canada, with a higher gasoline usage per head than the U.S., despite higher prices, because of huge distances and a tiny population.
With the Chinese auto sales up nearly 50 % in the first half of '06 vs '05, i look forward to see where the Chinese rate in Rafael's measure of national selfishness.

Vehicle-miles per person (annually)
======================
Canada - 5,546
US - 9,316

US is 68% higher than Canada.

Gallons of fuel per person (annually)
======================
Canada - 264
US - 475

US is 80% higher than Canada.

There goes that one, too, Tan.

Refs.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/pol/en/Report/anre2005/7D_e.htm
http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_04_12.html
http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_04_12.html

Andrey -

you're right, European governments did introduce taxes to limit their nations' dependence on foreign oil. Diesel engines are more fuel efficient. Their fuel is still taxed more lightly today, at least by energy content, because the agricultural and haulage lobbies are very strong. Unlike the US situation, in the EU emissions and fuel economy targets have always been set by one and the same agency - this has favored a trade-off between air quality and dependence on foreign oil. Nevertheless, emissions reductions of 80-98% have been achieved in less than 20 years.

Btw, the US does levy fuel taxes, they are just much lower than in Europe. There's also a gas guzzler tax, which can run into thousands of dollars per vehicle - in order to dissuade sales and hence, fuel consumption. Your ideas about US tax philosophy are not entirely accurate.

It is also true that European governments have become fiscally dependent on income from fuel taxes. In Germany, they represent the #2 source of revenue for the federal finance minister. Note that the German states (Laender) are not allowed to raise income taxes, unlike their counterparts in the US and Canada. The dependence on fuel taxes is one reason why biodiesel is now being taxed, although at a much lower rate than mineral fuels. The currently very low tax rate for CNG has been "guaranteed" through 2020.

It is to avoid this dependency trap that I've suggested that any additional fuel taxes raised in the US should be disbursed by way of flat income tax credits. That would turn the exercise into one of straight redistribution of wealth from gas guzzlers to gas misers, regardless of the income level of the vehicle's owner.

It is simply nonsense to state that European governments are actively suppressing hybrid cars. It's just that the fuel economy they offer is not all that much better than that of diesels. Owning a relatively exotic car always represents a risk in terms of service locations and resale value, so most Europeans are sticking with the diesel for now. Note that diesels became popular when Western Europe switched to unleaded gasoline in the late 80s/early 90s, a painful process because all the national governments had to agree. Technological advances such as direct injection and turbocharging have bolstered diesel market share.

I rode in rickshaws in India. They are efficient and fun to ride, but would be a deathtrap in US streets filled with Hummers and Excursions.

Joseph: Yes, so called “sin taxes” – tobacco, alcohol, gambling. It does not change big picture.

But you said:
"US does not tax any commodity, goods, or service to regulate consumption."

Lots of things are taxed in the US - some at very high rates. There are often many reasons for those taxes. So I don't think any blamket statement can be made about them, especially since taxation occurs not only on a federal level, but on state and a variety of local levels as well. Can't generalize about it.

Whith a 3 wheeler like this who needs a car..........?

Brent,

I appreciate the thread on rickshaws here. I have a business down in Houston, Texas (USA) that provides tip based short distance rides on three wheeled motorized rickshaws. We don't have an established route, but at many city events, we work alongside METRO and lines have actually been forming for Ricky rides for more personalized, door-to-door service.

I worked on my business plan for three years prior to our actual launch June 2007. Bringing a vehicle into the US is a pain in having to deal with the EPA, DOT and the customs in both countries. We’ve been very disappointed in the initial product quality and reliability on our first design and have a new and improved model being designed.

One of the biggest nuisances of the pedicabs is their wreckless disregard of the law. Weaving through traffic, driving on sidewalks, blowing through stop signs and lights, going the wrong way on one way streets, are some of the reasons they are dangerous (All of this without seatbelts or helmets for the passengers). One of the responses listed these behaviors as an advantage which i strongly disagree with. I've seen wheels folded in half in the middle of the street with the pedicab loaded two high in the seats with no safety belts or helmets. This is was in a busy street where they were already causing traffic delays cruising at maybe 8mph.

Our vehicles do not drive on freeways due to the safety concerns, but provide short distance rides in the CBD area and special events, parties and weddings (hourly rates). Taxis accept us, pedicabs feel threatened, and the city is close to adopting a much needed ordinance regulating us and the bicycled pedicabs.

I think the US is ready for these vehicles and from what I have experienced, if operated safely with the proper type of vehicles, their popularity will continue to grow.

Thanks
Chris Laflin
President
Ricky Rickshaw Rides
[email protected]
www.rickyrides.com