January 03, 2013


ELECTRIC VEHICLES NOT HOLDING THEIR CHARGE

Electric Car 2.jpgThe premise and promise of electric vehicles has received extraordinary media attention in the past decade, exciting those who believe they could be the answer to using fossil fuels in our vehicles and would keep dollars in drivers’ wallets.

It’s not happening, according to a J.D. Power and Associates study of electric vehicle (battery-powered rechargeable batteries) ownership that has received only mild media attention.

Electric vehicles became readily available two years ago and now include, among others, the Nissan Leaf, Chevrolet Volt, Honda Fit and Mitsubishi MiEV mini-car. Tesla Motors now markets a high-end Model S electric hatchback.

Volkswagen is testing an electric Golf.

While it sounds like a trend, newspaper accounts of the J.D. Power study note sales have been anemic so far, all below manufacturer predictions.

What continues to sell well are gasoline/electric hybrids, where Toyota leads the way with the Prius and other hybrids.

Buyers of electric cars often do so for environmental reasons, citing the lack of emissions from electric only vehicles.  But those who are thinking of buying an electric car are primarily thinking of saving money on gas, and like some hybrids, the payoff in gasoline savings is years past the purchase.

Here’s what the study said.

“EV owners report an average monthly increase in their utility bill of just $18 to recharge their vehicle’s battery, which is significantly less than the $147 that they would typically pay for gasoline during the same period.”

Nice.

But how long does it take to earn back that $129 a month savings?

Since an electric-only (and many hybrids) cost as much as $10,000 more than a similar gas-powered vehicle, it would take average of 6.5 years to recoup the additional money paid for the electric vehicle. Many owners buy a new car every four to five years.

So unless the cost of the batteries in the electric vehicles is reduced, it isn’t a good financial decision and none of this measures the inconvenience of recharging the vehicle’s battery.

Being green can be costly.​

Published: 1/3/2013  8:00 AM | 0  Comments | 0  Links to this post




December 27, 2012


STUDY CLAIMS MORE WOMEN DRIVERS TODAY THAN MEN

woman driving.jpgWomen are beginning to outnumber men on the highway, according to a study by the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute.

The implications: women are more likely to purchase smaller, safer and more fuel-efficient vehicles; they spend less time behind the wheel; they live longer and they have a lower traffic death rate than men.

The 15-year study, according to news reports, shows a sharper decline in driver licenses for men aged 25-29 than for women of the same age.  

The study covered 1995-2010 and noted the rate of young men ages 18-34 living at home has been increasing and is greater than the rate of young women the same age living at home.

One factor could be the cost of automobile insurance for those under 25, combined with unemployment and underemployment that makes owning a car financially challenging.

In South Carolina in 2009, women represented 50.3% of licensed drivers – about 20,000 more than the 1,711,125 licensed male drivers. When it came to collisions that year, however, women were involved in 46.3% of the crashes – men in 53.7%. When it came to being in fatal crashes, men were involved more than twice as often with 69.3% of the deaths as compared to 27.2% for women (3.4% gender unrecorded).

For 2010 in North Carolina, women represented 51.7% of licensed drivers – about 230,000 more than the 3,351,846 licensed male drivers. When it came to collisions in 2010, men were involved in 54% of the crashes; women in 45.8% (remainder not identified). When it came to being in fatal crashes, men were involved twice as often with 71.8% of the deaths as compared to 28.2% for women.

Published: 12/27/2012  8:00 AM | 0  Comments | 0  Links to this post




December 20, 2012


HOLIDAY FESTIVIES OFTEN INCLUDE DRINKING THAT SOMETIMES ENDS IN DEATH

Drink with Keys.jpgIt’s the worst kind of news. Someone went out to have a good time, visited with friends or family and ended up in the morgue the next day as one of the 10,000 people who lose their lives each year by driving drunk.

We've all heard the messages on the safe thing to do:

 Don’t drink and drive.
 Use a designated driver.
 Call a cab.

The problem is few partygoers make a plan in advance. And once the drinking starts, judgment blurs, attitudes come into play and bad decisions are made.

Some sobering statistics to consider:

  • Someone dies in an alcohol-related crash in the U.S. every 48 minutes.
  • No one is immune because one-third of alcohol-related fatalities are passengers, occupants in other vehicles or pedestrians.
  • A first-time DUI conviction can result in a 6-12 month jail sentence and the penalties become more severe for repeat offenders.

This holiday season, make your new year's resolution one that can save a life - plan ahead before heading out for holiday festivities. Below are some suggestions to get you started:

  • The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has created a listing of sober/safe ride programs across the country. Find one in your area here, and save the number in your cell phone so you always have it on you.
  • Cabs will often allow you to schedule a pick-up time in advance. Contact your local cab company to arrange transportation.
  • If you are throwing a holiday party, provide plenty of non-alcholic drinks for designated drivers. Have someone who is not drinking be in charge of everyone's keys. Keep a list of cabs or safe ride programs handy for that person to call if needed.

We wish you and yours a safe and happy holiday season. ​

Published: 12/20/2012  8:00 AM | 0  Comments | 0  Links to this post




December 13, 2012


HOW MUCH DO TRAFFIC OFFENSES RAISE INSURANCE RATE

A traffic ticket is a red light alerting insurance companies to stop and see how much they should raise your automobile insurance rate.Police with Ticket.jpg

A neat online graphic providing average rate increases is available at www.insurance.com, an insurance website representing several companies that uses the motto “May the best quote win.”

They show price increases ranging, on average, from 3% for not wearing a seat belt to 22% for reckless driving. Increases differ in detail from state to state.

The graphic notes reckless driving may be “driving while in the embrace of another” (Washington State) or more commonly driving in excess of 80 mph, driving too fast for road/weather conditions and knowingly driving in a way that endangers others (like cutting in and out of lanes at high speeds in front of other vehicles).

Here are some of their general definitions of offenses and the average rate increase for that offense:

  • Careless Driving (can be reading (text, newspaper, book or map) while driving) – 16%
  • Driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol – 19% with the highest percentage of ticketed DUI offenders living in Los Angeles, San Diego and Indianapolis.
  • Speeding 1-14 mph over the posted speed limit – 11%
  • Speeding 15-29 mph over the posted speed limit – 13%
  • Speeding 30 mph over the posted speed limit – 15%
  • Failure to stop – 15% (This is considered a crime in California and could create a criminal record if convicted.)
  • Improper turn – 14% (often a U-turn)
  • Failure to yield – 9%
  • No car insurance – 6% (when you have to buy some)

The website notes that over the last five years, the annual two-week “click-it-or-ticket” crackdown has yielded 3 million citations – or one every second.​

Published: 12/13/2012  8:00 AM | 0  Comments | 0  Links to this post




December 06, 2012


NO-TAX-HIKE PLEDGE FEELS RESPONSIBLE BUT WILL LEAVE AN EXPENSIVE LEGACY

Money.jpgIn the rough and tumble world of politics, it is easy to troll for votes by pledging not to raise taxes, despite compelling need and a knowledge that a penny saved today will result in dollars spent tomorrow.

South Carolina continues to elect legislators who have signed a no-tax-hike pledge, although, as The Charleston Post and Courier stated in an excellent editorial on November 25, 2012, their numbers have diminished slightly – down one legislator in the House, three less in the Senate.

The pledge hinders the one tax hike that the state continues to ignore at its own peril – an increase in one of the lowest gas taxes in the nation. South Carolina’s tax is 16 cents a gallon and hasn’t been increased in 25 years while the state’s population has tripled and tourism has become one of the Palmetto State’s most important industries.

Why is raising the gas tax so important? Three big reasons.

First, it is a user’s tax. Don’t drive, don’t pay. Use the roads, pay for their upkeep.

Second, the state has a $20 billion backlog for road and bridge maintenance, according to the Post and Courier. Replacement costs more than repair and maintenance.

Third, a higher tax will add millions to state coffers in a state that badly needs to keep its transportation infrastructure in decent shape for commerce, tourists and local commuters.

There will be a price to pay for only thinking of today’s pocketbook; not tomorrow’s costs when increasing potholes, rough pavement, faded street markings, closed bridges and growing congestion require huge financial outlays.

While some think this is good fiscal conservatism, as the Post and Courier correctly pointed out, it is more akin to political expediency than personal philosophy.

South Carolina’s Department of Transportation squeezes every dollar it can to fight the deterioration and has often been cited for the efficient use of the less-than-adequate dollars it currently receives.

It would be a pleasant surprise if the legislature where to think ahead about what is good for the state rather than if their no-tax-hike pledge is good enough for them to get re-elected.​

Published: 12/6/2012  8:00 AM | 0  Comments | 0  Links to this post




November 30, 2012


E15 GASOLINE COULD DAMAGE YOUR VEHICLE GOVERNMENT MANDATE NEEDS MORE STUDY

Gas Handle.JPGThe Environmental Protection Agency recently approved the use of E15 (85% gasoline and 15% ethanol) in the nation’s fuel pumps.

Yet 95 percent of consumers say they have never heard of E15 and nearly half do not know if it is approved for their car, according to a recent AAA survey.

Only about 12 million out of more than 240 light-duty (includes cars) on the road today are approved by manufacturers to use E15 fuel. Sustained use of E15 in both newer and older vehicles could result in significant problems such as accelerated engine wear and failure, according to AAA automotive engineering experts.

“Bringing E15 to the market without adequate safeguards does not responsibly meet the needs of consumers,” according to John Nielsen, AAA’s Director of Automotive Engineering and Repair.

Labeling and consumer education efforts are under way to mitigate problems for motorists and their vehicles. One requirement would be large pump signs noting that the fuel contained 15% ethanol.

Using E15 can void manufacturer warranties.

Five manufacturers are on record saying their warranties will not cover fuel-related claims caused by the use of E15. They are BMW, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota and Volkswagen. Ford, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Mazda and Mercedes-Benz have said E15 does not comply with the fuel requirements in their owner manuals and may void warranty cover.

The only light-duty (includes sedans, vans, pick-ups and SUVs) vehicles approved to use E15 are flex-fuel models, 2001 model year and newer Porsches, 2012 and newer GM vehicles and 2013 model-year Fords.

E15 is prohibited in heavy-duty vehicles, boats, motorcycles, power equipment, lawn mowers and off-road vehicles.

As of this date, E15 is only being sold in Kansas and Iowa but with the EPA approval, blenders can now begin increasing the ethanol content.

Published: 11/30/2012  10:00 AM | 0  Comments | 0  Links to this post




November 29, 2012


ONE IN SIX FATAL ACCIDENTS INVOLVE DROWSY DRIVING

Sleepy Driver.jpgLike so many behind-the-wheel behaviors that drivers know are dangerous, drowsy driving is one that is known but not well observed.

While 8 out of 10 drivers see drowsy driving as a serious threat to their personal safety, 3 out of 10 drivers in a survey by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety said that in the prior 30 days they had driven while so tired they had trouble keeping their eyes open.

Nearly 1 in 10 (9.7%) reported having fallen asleep or nodded-off while driving in the past year; 46% said they had done so at least once in their lifetime.

National crash statistics show 1 in 6 (16.5%) fatal crashes involve a drowsy driver. 

Talking/texting on a cell phone is considered dangerous by most drivers but is still practiced more often than not. Some drivers, usually younger ones, still fail to wear seat belts, and drunk driving remains a factor in 1 out of 3 fatal crashes each year.

It is a national phenomenon behind-the-wheel that we know what is dangerous when others do it, but somehow we feel that we can engage in those risky behaviors without consequence.

The statistics say differently. There is no need to become one.

Published: 11/29/2012  8:00 AM | 0  Comments | 0  Links to this post




November 22, 2012


SOUTH CAROLINA PARKS ABOUT TO PAY THEIR OWN WAY

In a state where revenues are precious, South Carolina’s 47 state parks, covering more than 80,000 acres, are only a year or two away from becoming self-sufficient.

South Carolina’s park user fees are designed to avoid needing revenue from the state’s general fund to keep the parks well maintained and a viable outdoor entertainment option.

By raising rates for cabins and campgrounds to approach the level of private accommodations, annual revenue has reached $21 million, according to The State newspaper. Golf courses, fireworks, swimming, picnic shelters, fishing piers, historic sites and tours, multi-park/activity passes and admission fees are among revenue generating park features. 

It costs approximately $24 million to operate the four-dozen parks each year and the admission price ranges from free to $7.50. An annual pass to all state parks costs $75 with a $99 pass adding extra services.

Santee State Park store.JPG
 

Santee State Park

Approximately 8 million visitor days were recorded last fiscal year.

Duane Parrish, director of State Parks, Recreation and Tourism, told the AP the state is developing its first-ever guidebook for the parks with help from BMW and Fuji film, both of which have major manufacturing plants in the state.

Currently only two state park systems – both with revenue-generation ski resorts – pay their way: New Hampshire and Vermont.

 

 

 

​

Published: 11/22/2012  8:00 AM | 0  Comments | 0  Links to this post




November 15, 2012


LICENSE TO READ YOUR LICENSE PLATE

If someone steals your car, do you want police to be able to photograph vehicle license plates in hopes of catching the thief?LicensePlate_Blog.jpg

If you are just driving – anywhere – do you want police photographing your license plate and putting it in a database for a limited amount of time?

Public safety versus privacy is the issue.

Raleigh and Charlotte police departments, among others in North Carolina, use automated license plate readers (ALPR’s) today to capture license plate numbers.

The information goes into a database that contains information about stolen license plates and crimes where a license plate number may have been detected. It can be used, because of the date and time stamp, to confirm or discredit an alibi by a crime suspect.

The ALPR’s can be found in police cars (Raleigh has six) or in cameras mounted on telephone poles or bridge supports, like Charlotte, where there are about 36 planned at intersections.

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed court suits in 38 states requesting information on how the data is used because the ACLU says without safeguards the information could track and record people’s movements and is a clear risk to privacy. They worry about profiling or tracking innocent people who have done nothing wrong.

Police departments argue the cameras are used for public safety, not to track people’s movements or habits. In Charlotte, the information collected is automatically deleted after 18 months; in Raleigh it is deleted after six months.​

Published: 11/15/2012  8:00 AM | 0  Comments | 0  Links to this post




November 06, 2012


CELL PHONES - NOT IN MY RESTAURANT

Cell Phone Restaurant.JPGLike the nationwide use of cell phones while driving, cell phone use inside restaurants has been proliferating, sometimes causing delays in check-out lines, disturbing nearby diners and creating a different eating environment.

The conflict has two sides with restaurants and their owners in the middle.

On one side are those who can’t spend a waking moment without a cell phone in their hands – sometimes for social reasons, sometimes for business and sometimes for just plain online security.

Then there are diners who don’t want to hear the phone ring or listen to loud conversations (voices tend to escalate when talking on a cell phone) or stand behind someone in line talking on the phone instead of paying attention to the check-out clerk.

The battle was detailed in a recent Associated Press article by Michael Hill.

He noted a Facebook campaign to ban cell phones from restaurants, a restaurant offering discounts if the phone is checked upon arrival and another adding an extra fee if it is used in the restaurant. One cafe posted a “No cell phones at the counter” sign.

Banning certain behavior – or guests – from a restaurant is an ongoing struggle for some.  Smoking bans have grown popular in the past few years. Some restaurants ban children after a certain hour to quiet the restaurant environment.

Then there’s New York City where, at the urging of Mayor Michael Bloomberg, trans fats were banned five years ago from being used in restaurants – a ban that hasn’t diminished New York City’s reputation as a sophisticated dining Mecca.

But cell phones are different.

They are omni-present. Usage is as polite – or rude – as the owner.

Will your favorite restaurant ask you to turn yours off or let you do what you feel is socially acceptable?

Just reducing usage could also be a goal.

When eating in a group, Hill talks about the “phone stack” challenge. Everyone in the group puts their cell phone in the center of the table and the first one to pick theirs up, pays the entire bill.

In the final analysis, this controversy/conflict has just begun. And there may be no winners.​

Published: 11/6/2012  8:00 AM | 0  Comments | 0  Links to this post




 Next >>