Whitmer: Entirely new approach needed to 'fix the damn roads'

I wonder what this new approach will look like?Whitmer: Entirely new approach needed to 'fix the damn roads'

Quote:

---

Michigan's road funding primarily comes from fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees, plus $600 million a year from the state's general fund.In 2020, Whitmer went around the Legislature to get the State Transportation Commission to OK $3.5-billion in bonds to help her step up road repairs. She's also used general funds and Michigan's share of President Joe Biden's $1.2-trillion infrastructure bill to ramp up projects on Michigan roads long known for their poor quality.
But now, a whole new approach is needed, she said.
"We are undergoing a historic transformation from ICE [[internal combustion engines) to EVs [[electric vehicles) and being able to build out and maintain infrastructure that can support this technology is something that every state in the country is going to grapple with," Whitmer said.

---

https://www.freep.com/story/news/pol...s/69653322007/

This article starts out with Gov. Whitmer's entirely new but not specific approach to fixing roads but then switches topics to accommodating EVs. Fixing road is not the same as accomodating EVs unless she is planning to attach new taxes to EVs to pay for "the damn roads" and EV facilities. It is probably an excellent political idea to set up a tax structure making EV owners pay for their share of fixing roads before there are large numbers of EV owners angry about higher taxes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

unless she is planning to attach new taxes to EVs to pay for "the damn roads" and EV facilities.

---

That's what I figured.

Probably referring to underground wiring tunnels for the tens of thousands of charging stations needed, dozens of new natural gas fired power plants to generate the electricity and the purchasing of tens of thousands of acres of roadside property on which to build the charging stations.

Perhaps also thicker road beds to deal with the vastly increased weight of some of the EV's? The Hummer EV for example weighs over 9,250 lbs.

It would be reasonable to add 1,300 dollars a year or so to the registration of such a vehicle to pay for the road wear it does while paying no gas taxes. [51c a gallon ish, depending on gas price).

Should probably be 2 components to the EV registration road fee. One being a blanket $500 ish annual fee to replace the lost gas taxes, and another one based on weight.

I.E.
$500 + $800 a year for the Hummer Pickup = $1,300.
$500 + 120 for a Mustang Mach E or Tesla Model X = $620.
$500 + $0 for a Chevy Bolt [just 3,600 lbs] .

Plus the regular fees of a couple hundred or so.

The average weight of a car today comes in right around 4,100 pounds. I own a Bolt so, by that reasoning, I should pay less than the average car owner. I live in Wisconsin where there is a $75 surcharge on hybrids and a $100 surcharge on EVs. I don't complain as it seems a fair trade off to pay for my share of roads. Gov. Whitmer must be planning to do something more ambitious though if she wants "to build out and maintain infrastructure that can support [[EV) technology". The extra $100/year just helps pay for roads. As a lame duck Governor, she doesn't have much to lose if she greatly increases registration fees. It might even qualify her for some future position such as transportation, environmental secretary, or VP.

On top of the funds outlined Michigan received 11 billion in infrastructure funds one would think it would be more prudent to fix the current roads with the free money and tax as you go to add the additional EV requirements.

EV stuff is still new technology and technology is constantly evolving,you could spend 50 billion setting up for EVs today and by the time they become mainstream that technology is obsolete and then you have to do it all over again while the local taxpayers are still paying for the last installation.

The roads are the foundation for both types of vehicles and the most expensive,it’s like putting replacement windows in a house that needs a roof.

Not for nothing but in Europe it is private companies that are setting up the charging infrastructure and paying for it,they get a return from the charging fees.

The EVs of today are like the model A ,3 years from now they are not going to be puttering about with 3000 lb batteries in them,every day in-between somebody is looking to build a better mouse trap,as much as they tout that solar is the answer,push comes to shove one can always duct tape a solar panel on the roof and be good to go.

We just gotta' pray that Xi's Belt and Road comes here, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Whalley

We just gotta' pray that Xi's Belt and Road comes here, too.

---

Yea they already tried that with a couple of bridges in California,that had to be immediately rebuilt at the taxpayers expense for a second time.

All they had to do was go to the dollar store and see the quality of the products China produces,o gee let’s let them build a bridge for us,they know how to do it cheaper.

People laughed at the concept of buying Greenland,but that is exactly what China did when they turned around and gave them billions to update their infrastructure,it’s all fun and games until the repo man knocks on the door.

They have gained control of major ports and power stations across the world by simply loaning money to countries that they knew would not be able to repay the debt and took control of the collateral when a payment was missed.

They have 1 man machines that you drive over the top of a pot hole and the machine fixes it correctly,they should take some of that free money and invest in some of those machines for each city,it would save each city millions.

1 man 8 hours a day fixing potholes,he would be like that matag repair man after awhile,just sitting around waiting for another pothole to appear.

Cant have solutions though,it makes it tough to come back to the taxpayers for more money if you actually solve a problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Whalley

We just gotta' pray that Xi's Belt and Road comes here, too.

---

The Belt and Road is scheduled for completion in 2048. China's new silk road of commerce. I'm pretty sure the US will accomplish less than zero between now and 2048. More Benghazi hearings...

She never mentioned this during the debates nor as she campaigned. If she want to create longer lasting road put more money into mass transit including for southeast Michigan. That will decrease the number of cars on the roads causing the roads to last longer. Cone up with an alternative way of melting the ice on the road. I don't know if chemicals were added to the salt put on the roads during the winter months. This salt is deteriorating road much quicker as well as destroying cars that were supposed to have rust proof undercoatings

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stasu1213

That will decrease the number of cars on the roads causing the roads to last longer.

---

It's not cars that destroy roads, it's trucks. Drive along John R in Madison Heights and compare the mile roads that hook up to freeways to the mile roads that don't. They both handle tons of traffic, but the roads that connect to freeways have a lot more truck traffic, and deteriorate at a *much* faster rate than the other mile roads. Check out the utter destruction of the roads at Whitcomb and Dequindre, where the UPS distribution facility is [[unless they recently repaved Whitcomb, they have to about every five to ten years or so)

You can try raising taxes on trucks, but the Teamsters come out hard against *any* tax affecting truckers, including fuel taxes, and they usually get shot down before they leave the legislature.

I agree heavy trucks tear up the roads,it is well recognized.

Thats why they pay a heavy truck tax over and above the regular tax.

In Florida you are taxed every year at registration renewal according to GVW,my 1 ton has a GVW of 10,000 and I pay $220 over what it costs for my car.I can only imagine the thousands that a heavy truck would pay.

They also only get between 4-15 mpg imagine how much tax they are paying on fuel alone when they are putting 300,000 miles a year.

On my F250 that’s hauling every day at todays prices,that’s $150 a day in fuel with a majority of that being taxes.

I do not think states have an infrastructure money problem,I think they have a how they spend money problem.

The other ting you have with the politicians they like to do things that make them look good while they are in office,so they come up with 4-8 year look good fixes that do not necessarily translate into real solutions.

I also think they are putting the cart before the horse with all of this EV as a pandering platform and they do waste billions looking for every way to increase the amount of vehicles on the road verses the most economical thing which would be to have less cars on the road.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

...As a lame duck Governor, she doesn't have much to lose if she greatly increases registration fees...

---

Waaay too soon to call Whitmer a "lame duck" when she hasn't even started her second term yet, and will have at least two years of a Legislature controlled by her party. "Lame duck" refers to someone whose successor has been elected but hasn't taken office yet.

It’s going to be another year before everybody gets settled in and that 11 billion is going to burning a hole in somebody’s pocket.

In that time frame some other drama will arise and it will be - What roads?

It will be interesting to watch though,a D gov and a D house and senate with a whole pile of cash,I am thinking that the 11 billion will be used as leverage in order to create 80 billion in more debt.

^ For people that live here we see first hand all of the projects going on. There are 270 across the state this weekend alone...

https://mdotjboss.state.mi.us/MiDrive/construction

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gistok

^ For people that live here we see first hand all of the projects going on. There are 270 across the state this weekend alone...

https://mdotjboss.state.mi.us/MiDrive/construction

---

Then why do the people that live there keep saying the roads need to be fixed and why did she run her first campaign on fixing the roads,why did the state need to collect $11 billion plus in infrastructure monies if everybody that lives there feels like the roads are not a problem?

270 ongoing projects means little

Michigan spends less money per capita on its roads and bridges than any other state in the nation.

https://www.michiganradio.org/transportation/2014-02-13/michigan-ranks-last-of-all-50-states-on-per-capita-road-spending

When you post 270 ongoing projects it’s a little vague,it can take up to 10 years for all of the red tape to clear for a major highway project to start,it’s not like they say,I am going to fix this road and then start tomorrow.


If you really lived there you would go here and really see the scope of work

https://www.michigan.gov/mdot//mdot/-/media/Project/Websites/MDOT/Programs/Planning/Five-Year-Transportation-Program/2022-2026-5YTP.pdf

Lots of repainting and applying epoxy surface materials,while still recognizing that it cost Michigan residents an additional $350 per year in damage to vehicles from bad roads.

But sense you live there and have verified the roads are in excellent condition I will take your word for it and just consider anybody else complaining about bad roads to be full of it.

It's going to take many years to fix what it took many years to break. As for what people on this forum say... that's just the anecdotes of people scattered all over... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gistok

It's going to take many years to fix what it took many years to break.

---

Exactly. To fix the damn roads we must fund the damn roads.

The gas tax is antiquated, we need to replace it with something better. VMT seems like a good and fair candidate.

Once we over the backlog hopefully we can maintain the roads at a more even pace. It's easier to budget that way. It's better for road users so that projects are spread out and not done all at the same time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scottathew

The gas tax is antiquated, we need to replace it with something better. VMT seems like a good and fair candidate.

---

It would be, if it's adjusted for vehicle weight.

But most sane people have a huge problem with a government tracking device continuously active in their car, recording the location of every mile driven.

Another option would be downloading the mileage of each car at time of getting your new tabs, and getting charged based on how many miles you drove last year. But that doesn't acct for miles driven out of state [I.E. road trips, or spending the winter down in Florida). It also involves effort, electronic devices and manpower at the Sec of State, and require every car to be taken to there when bought or sold. So 2 trips there to upgrade your car.

It also means poor people will have to pay more, as rich people won't have to pay full fare for their Ferraris and such that only get driven occasionally.

A gas tax is just so easy to do, and it charges people for miles driven in or near where they bought the gas, and even does a so-so job of charging heavier cars more [as they usually use more gas].


I think a weight-based surcharge for elec vehicles added to their registration fee, along with the gas tax for gas cars is probably the solution we'll end up with. Say $200 a year added to the registration of a Nissan Leaf or Chevy Bolt, and increasing to $900 for a Ford Lightning pickup and $1,300 for a Hummer EV [9,400 lb curb wt].

Collecting is one thing,spending what one collects on its intended use apparently is not.

The 10 states diverting the largest percentage of their gas tax money: New York diverts 37.5% of its gas tax revenue, Rhode Island diverts 37.1%, New Jersey and Michigan divert 33.9%, Maryland diverts 32.5%, Connecticut diverts 27%, Texas diverts 24%, Massachusetts diverts 23.9%, Florida diverts 13.6% and Vermont diverts 13.2%.

https://reason.org/policy-brief/how-...rts%2013.2%25.


Not to go down a rabbit hole of politics but ….

“This study shows that Michigan is a state that applies sales taxes onto fuel purchases and spends the revenue on other priorities than road repair,” James Hohman, Mackinac Center for Public Policy director of fiscal policy, told The Center Square.
“Some Michigan lawmakers have tried to change that as a way to improve road quality without raising taxes. But the move has been opposed by the state’s Democratic governor who prefers instead to raise taxes,” he said.

Hohman was referring in part to the 45-cent per gallon gas tax proposed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer as part of her attempt to raise more than $2.5 billion to honor her 2016 campaign promise to “fix the damn roads.”

Hohman was also referring to the method by which Michigan’s current sales taxes on fuel are diverted to school aid and the state’s General Fund.

https://tennesseestar.com/2020/07/05...-road-repairs/

Now you have bad schools and bad roads.

Do not know what the numbers were before the current governor but you appear to be going backwards by the 33.9 % per year currently.

I think they should just put a $10,000 sure charge on EVs per year,that should help.

.07 % is diverted to rail,which makes sense,do not fund the things that would actually remove vehicles from the roads,probably because the less people would be buying fuel.

They are also reporting that in 10 counties up to 10% of those populations are snowbirds,not sure how that effects the revenue drop during the winter months ?

So if you subtract 33.9% diversion funds,then the amount of snowbirds leaving not going to be easy to catch up,unless you add 33.9 % more gas tax in order to get to where you were before the diversion,my guess it will end up being more to divert and not really solve anything but increasing the cost of fuel.

The average state gas tax is 33.56 cents/gallon. Michigan's gas tax is 45 cents/gallon. The average car is driven 12,724 miles/year. The average ICE car gets 24.2 miles/gallon. Using the 45 cents/gallon Michigan figure and assuming an ICE car is driven 12,724 miles per year and gets 24.2 MPG, it would consume 526 gallons of gas a year and its Michigan state gas taxes would amount to $237/year. To make EV owners pay their fair share to maintain the "damn roads" an extra $237 surcharge would have to be added to their annual vehicle registration minus whatever State taxes they already pay on their electric bill that are EV related.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocket

I think a weight-based surcharge for elec vehicles added to their registration fee, along with the gas tax for gas cars is probably the solution we'll end up with. Say $200 a year added to the registration of a Nissan Leaf or Chevy Bolt, and increasing to $900 for a Ford Lightning pickup and $1,300 for a Hummer EV [9,400 lb curb wt].

---

Imperfect, but very reasonable.

One thing to keep in mind is that however we tax electric vehicles will be the way we tax nearly all vehicles. As gas vehicles phase out and electric starts to dominate. Whether that will be 2035, 2050, or beyond, I have no clue!

I still don't see an issue with tracking vehicles for the purposes of VMT, but I know some people will. We have the technology to charge people near-perfectly for their road usage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

The average state gas tax is 33.56 cents/gallon. Michigan's gas tax is 45 cents/gallon. The average car is driven 12,724 miles/year. The average ICE car gets 24.2 miles/gallon. Using the 45 cents/gallon Michigan figure and assuming an ICE car is driven 12,724 miles per year and gets 24.2 MPG, it would consume 526 gallons of gas a year and its Michigan state gas taxes would amount to $237/year. To make EV owners pay their fair share to maintain the "damn roads" an extra $237 surcharge would have to be added to their annual vehicle registration minus whatever State taxes they already pay on their electric bill that are EV related.

---

PLUS the 6 percent sales tax on gas. So if gas is $3.80 a gallon, that's another 22.8 cents worth of sales tax the state collects, for a total of 68 cents a gallon.

Though there is a little bit of tax on electricity, so perhaps we'll figure 65 cents? That increases that $237 figure to $342 a year.

And this doesn't adjust for miles driven like a gas tax does. Not sure how to be more fair to EV's without tracking device.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scottathew

Imperfect, but very reasonable.

One thing to keep in mind is that however we tax electric vehicles will be the way we tax nearly all vehicles. As gas vehicles phase out and electric starts to dominate. Whether that will be 2035, 2050, or beyond, I have no clue!

---

Well, there's a 99.9% chance that gonna happen. Not in the next 50 years at least.

We still have no idea how to make enough batteries, or how to generate enough electricity, or how to double the power grid and the variable power generation.

The batteries on that scale are not possible even in theory at this point, and even harder to solve is the power generation issue. It's not just a matter of building 200 nuke plants or coal plants. The big issue is dealing with the MASSIVE spike when everyone plugs in their cars at 5:30 after coming home from work. That's not an issue with gas, but elec has to be generated and delivered in real time, which means quadrupling the current power grid and generation systems. And it can't be hydro, or solar, or wind, or nuke, as none of those can be throttled up and down like that. The power will all have to come from natural gas or coal. Essentially we'll need to 8x our nat gas fracking. And if that starts running short we not only cripple our ability to get around, but our ability to stay warm in winter. Not smart.

It's just not gonna happen. 10% - 20% elec cars we can do. Especially if they ban rapid charging and make it so elec cars can only be charged slowly. If people charge their cars over a 12 hour period at night instead of a 1 hour period at 5:30, the elec generation and delivery problems becomes a bit easier to solve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocket

We still have no idea how to make enough batteries, or how to generate enough electricity, or how to double the power grid and the variable power generation.

---

We had no idea how to get enough gas out of the ground, how to distribute it, or how to get it in places where people need it when gas cars first came out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocket

The batteries on that scale are not possible even in theory at this point

---

Batteries on our current scale weren't possible two years ago. We figured it out. Lots of people are trying to figure this out even faster and so far are mostly succeeding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocket

, and even harder to solve is the power generation issue. It's not just a matter of building 200 nuke plants or coal plants. The big issue is dealing with the MASSIVE spike when everyone plugs in their cars at 5:30 after coming home from work. That's not an issue with gas, but elec has to be generated and delivered in real time, which means quadrupling the current power grid and generation systems. And it can't be hydro, or solar, or wind, or nuke, as none of those can be throttled up and down like that. The power will all have to come from natural gas or coal. Essentially we'll need to 8x our nat gas fracking. And if that starts running short we not only cripple our ability to get around, but our ability to stay warm in winter. Not smart.

---

Grid scale batteries use different technology than car batteries, and can solve this exact problem while peaking plants come online, and/or just buffer out renewables. Also, [[modern) natural gas plants generating electricity for EVs is a helluva lot cleaner than a gas car burning gas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocket

It's just not gonna happen. 10% - 20% elec cars we can do. Especially if they ban rapid charging and make it so elec cars can only be charged slowly. If people charge their cars over a 12 hour period at night instead of a 1 hour period at 5:30, the elec generation and delivery problems becomes a bit easier to solve.

---

DC fast charging is a problem for the grid if used at scale. The good news is that it isn't very commonly used. Most EVs do 90+% of their charging at level 1/2 speeds, which isn't going to change anything. Time of use plans from power companies [[and the ability to configure cars to refuse a charge at bad times, which all modern EVs have) will help with compliance there.

Long story short, you're right that today's grid and supply chain isn't ready to go 100% EV by tomorrow, but Rome wasn't built in a day.

Personally I see the world going to about 80% new car sales electric by 2030, with gas and diesel still around for some of the oddball use cases like people who do a lot of trailer pulling over long distances in the cold, rednecks who refuse electric out of principle, etc... That's not to say that 80% of cars on the road will be electric, just new car sales will be electric.

Over 85% of new car sales in Norway are EVs. By 2025, that number has to be 100%. I have not read of any significant problems there in laying out infrastructure or too much demand for electricity at 5:30pm. Of course, Norway's hydro-electric production is large enough that Norway exports electricity. However, even though most new car sales are EVs, most driving is still done in older non electric vehicles. That, by itself, postpones a sudden demand for more electricity by a decade.

A Norwegian friend said that most of the new ferries were electric especially for shorter crossings. He said that if, for instance, the ride was 15min., it would still take 20min to load the ferry with cars and trucks. That is enough time to recharge its batteries for the next crossing. Imagine the electrical demands of a small 300' ship using a fast charger. My level 2 charger in my garage charges at a rate of about 20 miles per hour in comparison.

Attachment 42351

Above photo from WE energy in SE WI, with a climate not too unlike Detroit's, shows the present low electrical usage from about 11pm to 6am. There is a lot of slack allowing for a lot of EV charging in that timeframe. Many utilities presently offer reduced rate plans for customers who want to use more electricity at night for washer, dryers, and EVs for instance.