Smug (Seattle, Tacoma, Snohomish: how much, tax, live)

[evergraystate]

Wasting tax payer money on this garbage is one thing (they bought 35 of them) but they have to rub it in your face too. Instead of city employees going out for lunch in the latest and greatest eco mobile, can you think of a better way the city of Seattle could have spent $1,000,000?


And just for fun, Snohomish county doesn't seem to have any problem using a 17 year old beat to hell neon.

[Arushan]

It's....... uuuuuhhhhhh ........uuuuuuuuhhhhhhh ...a way to get people to support .......um the green economy.......and ...um get our city more ...um Eco-friendly. And deficits don't matter at a city, state, or federal level. That's what "those guys" told me.

[Verio]

Originally Posted by Arushan

It's....... uuuuuhhhhhh ........uuuuuuuuhhhhhhh ...a way to get people to support .......um the green economy.......and ...um get our city more ...um Eco-friendly. And deficits don't matter at a city, state, or federal level. That's what "those guys" told me.

Checking in now, so I can read the thread later when all of the eco-nuts log on.

[HandsUpThumbsDown]

If these vehicles are expected to see lots of years and lots of miles, it is likely that the lower operating cost of the Leafs (leaves?) are a sound decision, economically, especially if the fleet needed replacement or expansion anyway.

[Seacove]

I have no opinion about the cars, maybe they are more economical to run and maintain, who knows. But it's always kind of funny to see someone that's come here from say...San Antonio, to enjoy the natural beauty of the area, only to diss those that care to preserve the beauty of the area.

[Bill Loney]

Obvious troll being obvious.

[Verio]

Originally Posted by Seacove

I have no opinion about the cars, maybe they are more economical to run and maintain, who knows. But it's always kind of funny to see someone that's come here from say...San Antonio, to enjoy the natural beauty of the area, only to diss those that care to preserve the beauty of the area.

Well, it's just like using the term "right-winger" or "leftist". There are people who are eco crazy on this board. I care about preserving the beauty of the area, just as anyone else who's born and raised here. By the way, I was born in Tacoma and lived for many years in Gig Harbor... but thanks for the San Antonio assumption.

Do we have long term data to determine what the operating cost and longevity is, for electric-only vehicles? I don't think we do. Investing large sums of money, on an unproven concept is just bad judgement and a gamble with tax payer dollars.

I'd rather an eco-friendly hybrid vehicle, where we have long term data from. The data actually shows that you need to own the vehicle for 5+ years before you even see ANY benefit (on average) from the vehicle, considering the higher cost of ownership upfront.

While production of electricity isn't as bad as burning fossil fuels, it also destroys our environment, so please don't preach to me about how electric-only vehicles are "good" for us.

[Seacove]

Originally Posted by Verio

Well, it's just like using the term "right-winger" or "leftist". There are people who are eco crazy on this board. I care about preserving the beauty of the area, just as anyone else who's born and raised here. By the way, I was born in Tacoma and lived for many years in Gig Harbor... but thanks for the San Antonio assumption.

Do we have long term data to determine what the operating cost and longevity is, for electric-only vehicles? I don't think we do. Investing large sums of money, on an unproven concept is just bad judgement and a gamble with tax payer dollars.

I'd rather an eco-friendly hybrid vehicle, where we have long term data from. The data actually shows that you need to own the vehicle for 5+ years before you even see ANY benefit (on average) from the vehicle, considering the higher cost of ownership upfront.

While production of electricity isn't as bad as burning fossil fuels, it also destroys our environment, so please don't preach to me about how electric-only vehicles are "good" for us.

San Antonio assumption? You came here from San Antonio. You also bragged about your Camaro and how much you enjoy speeding past hybrids so we know you're "pro gas".

It's not important other than your eco-nuts comment. All you need to do is look at coast lines that have not been taken care of to appreciate how important it is to take care of ours. Take a look at your property values twenty years from now if we take care of our pristine beauty when other cities choose not to.

[SitoUK]

Electric car - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can read in this article electric vehicles have been around since the 19th century, you could hardly call it an 'unproven concept'. It's only now that gas prices are shooting up that people (and organizations) see them as a sound investment.

My guess would be the vehicles in the fleet were due for replacement anyway, in which case it obviously makes sense to go for the green solution instead of spending the same amount of money on a fleet of gas guzzlers.

[Seacove]

Originally Posted by Verio

Checking in now, so I can read the thread later when all of the eco-nuts log on.

Your post is gone but my response was based on this. Hey, Seattle likes electric cars and maybe they are cheaper to maintain, easier to budget for since gas prices change and easier on the environment.

But no disrespect to PUD with their Neons, I'm a fan of PUD. They are the "Little Utility That Could". They exposed Enron by going through all those recorded calls and discovering what Enron did to California. Little Snohomish PUD did that.